some call it reverse discrimination.
whatever you want to refer to as, in your opinion, are white people being unfairly picked on?
it seems acceptable that if you are white you are viewed with disdain.
Not all "discrimination" is bad.
As Walter Williams used to point out, I discriminate all the time by having sex with my wife only. All those other women out there that I purposefully refuse....
I discriminate against egg salad. Forking disgusting.
The real question is : What is the discrimination BASED UPON?
anyone following the derek chauvin trial?.
if you are actually following it, not just listening to the media, you will likely realize that there is a huge gap between what is going on in court and what is being reported in the media.. if the trial was fair, i think he should be acquitted.
there is plenty of reasonable doubt about the cause of death (his dealer doesn't want to testify because he could be guilty of 3rd degree murder for selling him a fatal amount of fentanyl) and even doubt over whether the officer even had his knee on the guys neck or did anything counter to what they were meant to do as per policy.. but is it fair?
... it just looks really bad when a cop lays his knee across someone's neck when they its noted that the individual is assumed to be clinically dead.
Sure. It looked bad. That's why, when this first occurred, you had near universal agreement that Chauvin was at fault. But, like always, you wait a bit. The evidence comes out, and the full story is not nearly as clear.
But that was the point of Crowder's demonstrations (2 total). If this position really cuts off the air, or is a "blood choke", then let's give it a shot. He tried it twice, with more weight. It *looks* bad. And, it is painful, but not deadly.
Granted, the jury was never exposed to any demonstration like this, and I think it would have been a great demonstration to have, right there in the court. Let's just see what happens when you take a man, whos not about to explode in 5 minutes, and place him under that hold.
anyone following the derek chauvin trial?.
if you are actually following it, not just listening to the media, you will likely realize that there is a huge gap between what is going on in court and what is being reported in the media.. if the trial was fair, i think he should be acquitted.
there is plenty of reasonable doubt about the cause of death (his dealer doesn't want to testify because he could be guilty of 3rd degree murder for selling him a fatal amount of fentanyl) and even doubt over whether the officer even had his knee on the guys neck or did anything counter to what they were meant to do as per policy.. but is it fair?
With the toxicology report in hand and her testimony, why wasn't that used to establish cause of the death ?
It was. They asked the medical examiner - If you had seen Floyd's body, without the tape, what you you think. Answer: drug overdose or heart attack.
You would think the defense lawyers would use this during the trial.
Uhhh he did. BTW, it was one lawyer against about 10 ... but whatever. I happen to think that the lawyer for Chauvin did a good job, given all that he was up against. And the judge did alright too - except he should have moved the trial to a location that wasn't so threatening.
If the toxicology report showed an enormous amount of fentanyl in his system which would caused a cardiac arrest as its known to, why didn't the involved doctors state so ?
They did. But the prosecution had their key witness. I doctor who didn't get paid, as if that means he is any more credible. Seems he had an agenda. He took the stand and declared that there was no other cause, not even a little bit, that caused this death. Not the drugs, not the heart condition, nothing.
And the jury, being faced with possible doxing and death threats, suddenly agreed with the prosecution.
anyone following the derek chauvin trial?.
if you are actually following it, not just listening to the media, you will likely realize that there is a huge gap between what is going on in court and what is being reported in the media.. if the trial was fair, i think he should be acquitted.
there is plenty of reasonable doubt about the cause of death (his dealer doesn't want to testify because he could be guilty of 3rd degree murder for selling him a fatal amount of fentanyl) and even doubt over whether the officer even had his knee on the guys neck or did anything counter to what they were meant to do as per policy.. but is it fair?
The above is irrelevant because it was not filmed. What was filmed is "Knee on the neck" and after that, it is case closed.
Yeap. When the medical examiners were asked (again, in the trial!) what they would conclude the cause of death to be if they just saw the body, answer: drug overdose or heart attack.
anyone following the derek chauvin trial?.
if you are actually following it, not just listening to the media, you will likely realize that there is a huge gap between what is going on in court and what is being reported in the media.. if the trial was fair, i think he should be acquitted.
there is plenty of reasonable doubt about the cause of death (his dealer doesn't want to testify because he could be guilty of 3rd degree murder for selling him a fatal amount of fentanyl) and even doubt over whether the officer even had his knee on the guys neck or did anything counter to what they were meant to do as per policy.. but is it fair?
@Simon: Yeah, there that question too. His blood was 98% oxygenated. Again, evidence that almost caused a mistrial, but in the trial nonetheless.
There was some question as to whether CPR could re-oxygenate the blood. The EMTs worked on him a while, and broke one rib doing CPR (again, brought out during trial). However, there really wasn’t any good answer to whether CPR could do that.
If it can, then it just invalidates the blood gas evidence. You can’t trust it. But that’s more reasonable doubt.
anyone following the derek chauvin trial?.
if you are actually following it, not just listening to the media, you will likely realize that there is a huge gap between what is going on in court and what is being reported in the media.. if the trial was fair, i think he should be acquitted.
there is plenty of reasonable doubt about the cause of death (his dealer doesn't want to testify because he could be guilty of 3rd degree murder for selling him a fatal amount of fentanyl) and even doubt over whether the officer even had his knee on the guys neck or did anything counter to what they were meant to do as per policy.. but is it fair?
He wasn't strung out high when the arrest took place, that can be confirmed by the video, so why do you say he would have OD'd in the back the police car ? He was cognitively fluent during the arrest from the start. Someone who is high on fentanyl doesn't act like that. Nonsensical. Making stuff up as it suits you doesn't present intellectual honesty.
Dude, WTF?! There was video of him in the store acting crazy, and stumbling around. That was BEFORE ingesting the drugs in the car. How do we know he did this? His girlfriend testified IN THE TRIAL that they were with their drug dealer, the very dealer that refused to testify on fifth amendment grounds because, as the drug dealer’s lawyer asserted, he has third degree murder exposure now. This all took place DURING THE TRIAL.
They were with their dealer, outside, when the cops arrived. Floyd ingested all the drugs to avoid possession charges, and most likely encouraged by the dealer, to avoid dealing charges. How do we know this? Because his girlfriend said so in her testimony IN THE TRIAL!
He didn’t have “traces” of fentanyl. He had over three times the amount needed to kill a man his size. Plus meth, plus heroin, plus weed. This was from the toxicology report submitted DURING THE TRIAL.
But he had resistance to drugs, right? Nope. Because he wasn’t buying fentanyl from the dealer. He was on meth. But the dealer was spiking the drugs with fentanyl. How do we know this? From his girlfriend’s testimony AT THE TRIAL.
It was a drug deal gone bad. He, and his dealer, didn’t want to get caught with the drugs. Floyd swallowed them. From that moment, he was a dead man.
None of this is made up, it’s right there in the forking trial!
anyone following the derek chauvin trial?.
if you are actually following it, not just listening to the media, you will likely realize that there is a huge gap between what is going on in court and what is being reported in the media.. if the trial was fair, i think he should be acquitted.
there is plenty of reasonable doubt about the cause of death (his dealer doesn't want to testify because he could be guilty of 3rd degree murder for selling him a fatal amount of fentanyl) and even doubt over whether the officer even had his knee on the guys neck or did anything counter to what they were meant to do as per policy.. but is it fair?
An off the cuff question to this case ...
Ummkay... why is it off-the-cuff? But I digress..
Did all of the attending cops not know that cutting off a person's breathing capability such a choke hold or knee against the neck could cause an individual to blackout and possibly die?
Yes, I'm sure all of them knew that cutting off a person's air would cause them to die. Who doesn't? So? What everyone saw was 1) Floyd die, and 2) Knee on the neck. And concluded that they were related. I would be willing to bet that if Floyd was forced into the back of the squad car, he would have just died there. It was an OD.
On what do I base this bet? Go back to the beginning of the thread. There are now two (2!) videos of Crowder getting the same treatment as Floyd. If this was a choke, it should affect all people the same, right? So if he gets a man of Chauvin's size to bounce around on this neck, and in some cases putting his entire weight on the neck, and sometimes putting his entire weight on the back, for more than 8 minutes, and Crowder has an ongoing heart condition, and he is fine - what does that tell you? Combine that with the levels of fentanyl, and the other drugs, and the testimony of his girlfriend (that they were in the middle of a drug deal and they were swallowed to hide the drugs)?
Can we rule out the knee from all causation? No. But based on all of the above, and the crowd's issue, and the rules around maintaining control of the situation, to me, this should have been acquittal.
anyone following the derek chauvin trial?.
if you are actually following it, not just listening to the media, you will likely realize that there is a huge gap between what is going on in court and what is being reported in the media.. if the trial was fair, i think he should be acquitted.
there is plenty of reasonable doubt about the cause of death (his dealer doesn't want to testify because he could be guilty of 3rd degree murder for selling him a fatal amount of fentanyl) and even doubt over whether the officer even had his knee on the guys neck or did anything counter to what they were meant to do as per policy.. but is it fair?
They don't seem to get it. NAACP regarding the shooting in OH of MaKhia:
Like I said - this is going to happen again and again and again. It had nothing to do with being black. The girl was stabbing someone else, or about to stab someone else. Nothing to do with race - but EVERYTHING to do with character and conduct. There is a lot more crime in the black community - and the black community needs to dig into that problem. It has to do with culture (stop the rap bullshit), focus on school, stop blaming whites, and bring back fathers. Unfortunately, the only way fathers will come back into the picture is if the black community stands up to the people they vote for (the left) and tell them that they don't want the government substituting for fathers.
anyone following the derek chauvin trial?.
if you are actually following it, not just listening to the media, you will likely realize that there is a huge gap between what is going on in court and what is being reported in the media.. if the trial was fair, i think he should be acquitted.
there is plenty of reasonable doubt about the cause of death (his dealer doesn't want to testify because he could be guilty of 3rd degree murder for selling him a fatal amount of fentanyl) and even doubt over whether the officer even had his knee on the guys neck or did anything counter to what they were meant to do as per policy.. but is it fair?
@pistolpete:
Cops everywhere, the ones that want to stay on, will be meeting with lawyers to try to figure out what they need to do in order to stay clear of trouble like this. That might seem, on the surface, like a desirable outcome. But like with many things, you might want to think a few layers down, and try to calculate the net effects. The BLM types might think this will spur the type of police reform they want - less enforcement of law, and limits on how rough you can get with someone. But the police are trained to stay ahead of the situation, always using one level of force greater than the suspect to subdue that suspect. If putting someone on the ground is off the table, they will just escalate to shooting.
The next Chauvin will get out of the squad car with the taser drawn. Ask him to get into the back of the squad car, and when he does not comply, immediate tasing. If he shakes that off, immediate shooting. Done.
anyone following the derek chauvin trial?.
if you are actually following it, not just listening to the media, you will likely realize that there is a huge gap between what is going on in court and what is being reported in the media.. if the trial was fair, i think he should be acquitted.
there is plenty of reasonable doubt about the cause of death (his dealer doesn't want to testify because he could be guilty of 3rd degree murder for selling him a fatal amount of fentanyl) and even doubt over whether the officer even had his knee on the guys neck or did anything counter to what they were meant to do as per policy.. but is it fair?
JUSTICE SERVED!
SOCIAL JUSTICE SERVED!
There, I fixed it for you.
