Because of how long he did it, after he lost consciousness and stopped breathing. Pretty simple. He posed no threat to them at that time. He was handcuffed. It was excessive force in my opinion. Common sense dictates you stop at a certain point. I agree that the Timpa case and this isn't that similar, and that was far worse than this. The look on that CUNT PIG face when he's being put into the ambulance, dead...It's literally second degree murder, obvious lack of concern for human life, yep...If Chauvin gets manslaughter, I'm not going to care, if he doesn't, I won't care either. But I think one thing we have to acknowledge is that the drug overdose, and the heart attack issue, is probably inaccurate. That doctor can't go up there, under oath and say there was no evidence of a heart attack. The toxicologist can't go up there and show a slideshow showing that the vast majority of DUI arrests who have fentanyl in their system was higher than Floyd's. Up until two days ago, I thought he died of a heart attack brought on by a drug overdose...My mind has been changed at this point, if I was one of those Jurors, I would be saying yes to manslaughter, I wouldn't entertain murder 1 and 90 percent no on murder 2. I do take your point about the approved restraint issue, to me that just means someone else is liable also.
Sounds like you just swallowed the prosecutions “expert” witness, who made his determination after “watching a cell phone video”. The knee to the neck/shoulder blades is SOP ffs. The officer didn’t have Floyd’s fucking medical records in his hands while he was restraining him.
I’m sorry I feel like you’re coming at this with good faith but you’re just totally wrong and sounds like you just kinda hate cops. Ok no fan of cops either but this is a trial that is only even happening because “white man bad”. None of us should cheer the mob while they try to lunch this officer.
I watched the whole 3 hours of testimony, those doctors watched the body cams, medical records, everything. Watch that video I linked for ten seconds, at the time stamp, if you think me thinking that Tempa involved officer should rot in prison, is me hating all cops, I don't know what to tell you...I'm more pro cop than pro criminal, but criminal cops are worse than just criminals in my opinion, not that, that's the argument I'm making in this case. That being said, your argument works both ways, Chauvin didn't have access to his medical records, so assuming he's in peak physical condition is kind of a stupid thing to do, right? Not to mention assuming he's high as balls on drugs, you won't convince me otherwise on that, we all have eyes. I do agree that the 1st degree murder charge is the "lynching", probably 2nd degree, But they're making a solid case for manslaughter, in my opinion. Can you respond to the fentanyl overdose and the heart attack issue though? Cause, we've been told that for months now, I was saying that myself, if you go through my comments long enough, you'll find that. With the SOP issue, yeah, if that's their defense, then so be it, I do take your point, which is why I would find him guilty of a lesser charge. The issue for me, is why didn't he take pressure from his back and neck after he was no threat, and unconscious, and how much of a role that played in his death. And he knew he was unconscious, you also won't convince me otherwise of that, whether he knew he wasn't breathing is more difficult to prove. I think he would have at least suspected that he wasn't. The SOP doesn't say to remain on them when they're unconscious, I'm assuming it doesn't say not to, which is what your argument is. One thing I'm curious about though, is in that testimony the prosecution asked whether there was any evidence of a heart attack, the Doctor said absolutely not. I don't know the answer to this, but is there always going to be evidence of a heart attack? Anyway, this is genuinely in good faith, so I do appreciate that. I'm open to new factoids presented, but if I'm one of those Jurors, I wouldn't be fighting too hard against manslaughter charges.
Even for manslaughter, the prosecution has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Chauvin caused Floyd's death. I don't see how a truly impartial juror could reach that conclusion in the face of the other obvious contributing causes of death.
Because of how long he did it, after he lost consciousness and stopped breathing. Pretty simple. He posed no threat to them at that time. He was handcuffed. It was excessive force in my opinion. Common sense dictates you stop at a certain point. I agree that the Timpa case and this isn't that similar, and that was far worse than this. The look on that CUNT PIG face when he's being put into the ambulance, dead...It's literally second degree murder, obvious lack of concern for human life, yep...If Chauvin gets manslaughter, I'm not going to care, if he doesn't, I won't care either. But I think one thing we have to acknowledge is that the drug overdose, and the heart attack issue, is probably inaccurate. That doctor can't go up there, under oath and say there was no evidence of a heart attack. The toxicologist can't go up there and show a slideshow showing that the vast majority of DUI arrests who have fentanyl in their system was higher than Floyd's. Up until two days ago, I thought he died of a heart attack brought on by a drug overdose...My mind has been changed at this point, if I was one of those Jurors, I would be saying yes to manslaughter, I wouldn't entertain murder 1 and 90 percent no on murder 2. I do take your point about the approved restraint issue, to me that just means someone else is liable also.
Sounds like you just swallowed the prosecutions “expert” witness, who made his determination after “watching a cell phone video”. The knee to the neck/shoulder blades is SOP ffs. The officer didn’t have Floyd’s fucking medical records in his hands while he was restraining him.
I’m sorry I feel like you’re coming at this with good faith but you’re just totally wrong and sounds like you just kinda hate cops. Ok no fan of cops either but this is a trial that is only even happening because “white man bad”. None of us should cheer the mob while they try to lunch this officer.
I watched the whole 3 hours of testimony, those doctors watched the body cams, medical records, everything. Watch that video I linked for ten seconds, at the time stamp, if you think me thinking that Tempa involved officer should rot in prison, is me hating all cops, I don't know what to tell you...I'm more pro cop than pro criminal, but criminal cops are worse than just criminals in my opinion, not that, that's the argument I'm making in this case. That being said, your argument works both ways, Chauvin didn't have access to his medical records, so assuming he's in peak physical condition is kind of a stupid thing to do, right? Not to mention assuming he's high as balls on drugs, you won't convince me otherwise on that, we all have eyes. I do agree that the 1st degree murder charge is the "lynching", probably 2nd degree, But they're making a solid case for manslaughter, in my opinion. Can you respond to the fentanyl overdose and the heart attack issue though? Cause, we've been told that for months now, I was saying that myself, if you go through my comments long enough, you'll find that. With the SOP issue, yeah, if that's their defense, then so be it, I do take your point, which is why I would find him guilty of a lesser charge. The issue for me, is why didn't he take pressure from his back and neck after he was no threat, and unconscious, and how much of a role that played in his death. And he knew he was unconscious, you also won't convince me otherwise of that, whether he knew he wasn't breathing is more difficult to prove. I think he would have at least suspected that he wasn't. The SOP doesn't say to remain on them when they're unconscious, I'm assuming it doesn't say not to, which is what your argument is. One thing I'm curious about though, is in that testimony the prosecution asked whether there was any evidence of a heart attack, the Doctor said absolutely not. I don't know the answer to this, but is there always going to be evidence of a heart attack? Anyway, this is genuinely in good faith, so I do appreciate that. I'm open to new factoids presented, but if I'm one of those Jurors, I wouldn't be fighting too hard against manslaughter charges.
Even for manslaughter, the prosecution has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Chauvin caused Floyd's death. I don't see how a truly impartial juror could reach that conclusion in the face of the other obvious contributing causes of death.