Posted on 04/08/2021 6:58:16 AM PDT by ScubaDiver
It doesn’t make any difference how bad the prosecutor is or how empty the prosecution’s case is.
The jury verdict has already been predetermined.
So in short, it again looks like the endlessly parroted media narrative may not quite have been accurate?
Color me shocked. /s
I was watching the trial on a patriot YouTube channel that I seem to have lost the name of. Does anyone have any recommendations for viewing other than the mainstream RAT offerings?
Everybody just STFU.
The cop put his knee on a cuffed perp.
He posed NO ADDITIONAL THREAT.
Chauvin was a retard.
Just back off and put him in the back of the patrol car.
Hell, tether his feet too.
Chauvin murdered the guy regardless.
End of story.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/10/us/derek-chauvin-trial-jurors/index.html
Five men and nine women have been chosen to serve on the jury during the trial in Minneapolis. Of the 14 jurors, eight are White, four are Black and two are mixed race, according to how the court says the jurors identified themselves.
...
The jurors in Chauvin’s case all come from Hennepin County, which is demographically about 74% White and 14% Black, according to census data.
So, the jurors are all local and facing mob violence if they don’t vote guilty. If one or two jurors won’t give the right answer, there are two replacements. Chauvin, no matter how good his defense lawyer is (apparently quite good...) doesn’t have a chance. Facts don’t matter, just the threat of mob violence.
I think Cheech and Chong did a cover of that one as well.
Excellent article. I don’t trust paid expert witnesses. But why would the prosecution use an expert who never testified in State or federal court before and from California.
Nelson is very good.
Sorry.
That’s a standard method of restraining a suspect who is not being cooperative - as the PROSECUTION witness testified.
Chauvin did nothing wrong. Floyd killed himself by swallowing his ‘inventory.’
Lots of women.
+1
Yep. Pop popcorn.
I agree. I wasn’t sure about him during his opening arguments. But, he is a deliberate, meticulous litigator who is dismantling the state’s case, sometimes with an Exacto knife and other times with a sledge-hammer. Chauvin chose wisely.
With respect to why they chose this guy, I think the notion that he was the best they could do is not an unreasonable one. Purely from a legal perspective, this case is a loser all day long.
“Standard method of restraining.” ...until you get the cuffs on.
You can’t justify the knee on neck after that.
You can’t.
My porch light is LED Blue.
Love our local cops, but can’t justify this in my mind.
Cops don’t have indiscriminate lethal authority.
...and that’s a good thing.
I believe - but am not 100% certain - that it’s not the local prosecutor who brought this case. Instead, it was Ellison himself. That is his team litigating on behalf of the state.
CNN trying desperately to present the opposite:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(CNN)The special agent who led the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension investigation into George Floyd’s death struggled to make sense of a short phrase Floyd said last May as Derek Chauvin kneeled on him.
Senior Special Agent James Reyerson was shown a clip from Minneapolis Police body-camera footage of Floyd saying something while handcuffed and in a prone position on the ground.
“Did it appear that Mr. Floyd said, ‘I ate too many drugs?” defense attorney Eric Nelson asked Reyerson.
“Yes, it did,” Reyerson said.
After a short break, the prosecution played for Reyerson a longer clip of the video that provided the lead up to that comment.
“Having heard it in context, are you able to tell what Mr. Floyd is saying there?” prosecutor Matthew Frank asked.
“Yes, I believe Mr. Floyd was saying, ‘I ain’t do no drugs,” Reyerson replied.
The testimony came on the eighth day of Chauvin’s criminal trial as several investigators and forensic scientists testified about what they found at the crime scene, including Floyd’s blood stains and a few white pills containing fentanyl and methamphetamine.
Earlier in the day, a Los Angeles Police Department use-of-force expert hired by the prosecution testified that Chauvin had used excessive and deadly force on Floyd when none was needed.
..more
https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/07/us/derek-chauvin-trial-george-floyd-day-8/index.html
Will that matter to this jury?
____________________________________________________
Probably not, but yet again we now find out that the media/Democrats lied to us. I was a lone voice on FR early on in this case telling everybody to reserve judgment, etc. Unfortunately, I haven’t followed the case that closely because of work. My question is: Was Chauvin’s knee on the BASE of the neck (or shoulder area) the whole time or was that for just part of the time? If his knee was indeed not on Floyd’s neck, FREEPERS should riot and burn down the Washington Post and Ben Crump’s office.
No one is brining up that the two knew each other.
I agree. Manslaughter at best.
My standard is “IF a non cop does this, what would be the charges?”
First, the defense has already capably demonstrated that Chauvin’s knee wasn’t on Floyd’s neck. That’s fake news.
The state’s own witness disagreed. He said that he has had arrests where he kept the suspect ON THE GROUND by force as they waited for EMS to arrive. He also said that people who OD, pass out and then come to again, can be dangerously violent.
Not only did the state’s own witness offer that testimony, but he was forced to admit - under oath - that Chauvin actually DEESCALATED the use of force when he elected to NOT tase the suspect, something that would have been authorized considering Floyd’s non-compliance.
The guy at Legal Insurrection has been using the WashingtonPost YouTube feed.
“...Cities will burn anyway. It’s what they do....”
Because they let them. They’re afraid of them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.