280
posted ago by Eric-CIA-ramella ago by Eric-CIA-ramella +280 / -0

How the fuck can you be guilty of voluntarily AND involuntarily killing someone? I'm barely leagalese over here, any pedes that now for sure? Seems like a fucking dead giveaway the whole thing will be appealed, doesn't make sense.

Comments (30)
sorted by:
41
Moonman_Alpha 41 points ago +42 / -1

It's common core law.

16
TanfoglioStock2 16 points ago +17 / -1

It really doesn’t make sense to me either.... I also think they need to charge you with whatever they claim you did. When people have have 5 charges along a sliding scale and just see what sticks seems kinda bullshit to me.

18
Japan4Salt 18 points ago +19 / -1

Its called stacking charges, and its been an unfair feature of the criminal justice system for a long time. It helps them get you to accept a plea deal instead of going to trial. Keeps their conviction rate high.

9
TanfoglioStock2 9 points ago +10 / -1

It would seem to me that in a case like this 1 certain combinations shouldn’t be possible, like the jury should pick 1 from the sliding scale. Like if they lined up 5 T-shirt’s in front of you and said which one is correct size for you and you said all of em. A weird analogy

8
Japan4Salt 8 points ago +8 / -0

I agree that it doesn't make any sense. I smell a mistrial or at least an appeal leading to a retrial in the future. I don't know exactly why they came down with this verdict, my instinct is telling me everyone in this country is too cucked at the thought of national riots, which is a shame because riots are going to happen in the current atmosphere anyway. Might as well get them over with and deal with it.

12
GBA4ever 12 points ago +12 / -0

The jury convicted him of everything and ran for safety. Sad times we are living in.

6
WU_HAN_FRU 6 points ago +6 / -0

The jurors were doxed and were being personally threatened by a member of Congress and the "president" of the United States.

2
hectorspector 2 points ago +2 / -0

I have had the opinion for some time that only a jury should be allowed to convict anyone. No deals, no bench trials, no pleading guilty, only juries.

14
TheOne1 14 points ago +16 / -2

There is no longer justice in the court. There is no justice in the legislature. There is no justice in the executive. We are not allowed to peaceably assemble or petition the government for redress of grievance. There is no longer a solution at the electoral level. We are left with nothing but MineCraft to take back that which has been stolen from us. Time is almost up.

3
logan34 3 points ago +3 / -0

Secession or mortal kombat thats all that's left.

1
Gulleyfoyleismyname 1 point ago +1 / -0

Finish Xim!

13
308win 13 points ago +14 / -1

There are usually two types of manslaughter charges: voluntary and involuntary. Voluntary manslaughter charges may occur when a person who is strongly provoked kills someone else under the heat of passion.

Involuntary manslaughter occurs when someone acts in a criminally negligent or reckless way that causes the death of another.

How they got him for one of these is bullshit. The fact that they got him for both..shows the jury had no fucking clue what they were doing.

It will be appealed. No question.

10
AbrahamLincoln 10 points ago +10 / -0

You're making the mistake of thinking the jurors aren't complete retards/cowards.

9
AnointedVisions 9 points ago +10 / -1

Excuse me sir this is a Clown World

7
TGNX 7 points ago +8 / -1

PFM.

Pure. Fucking. Magic.

7
Grunt422 7 points ago +7 / -0

What ? Floyd died three times. No the state over charged him three ways to Sunday. I'm still trying to understand how he died with his wind cut off, but yet had a 98% oxygen level ? That seems very simple for a jury to understand !

4
thelken 4 points ago +5 / -1

This is what happens when "a jury of you peers" consists of blacks, women, soyboys, and jews.

Lets not act like the jury isn't completely at fault here.

And hell, under threat of violence.... Maybe they were simply saving their own skin.

3
Eric-CIA-ramella [S] 3 points ago +3 / -0

I agree the doxxing did not help, but I keep telling people these are liberal faggots from inner city hellholes, of course they wanted to crucify Chauvin.

However, what clearly happened, was that the defense was obviously MUCH MUCH better than the emotionally shitty prosecution. And much like 12 Angry Men, these jury faggots realized their fatal mistake half way through the trial - Chauvin is innocent, but they can't possibly rule that out of their own deep bias, media prosecution, and expectations of their nignog kin.

Liberals only ever have themselves to blame for the hell they create.

4
JohnCocktoastin 4 points ago +4 / -0

Here’s how this works:

2nd degree murder in Minnesota - they have what we normally know to be 2nd degree murder which is intent to kill. They also have a subset which is a violent felony resulting in death regardless of intent upgrades to second degree murder. They got him on first degree assault. This upgrades to 2nd degree murder.

2nd degree manslaughter - because the real conviction is 1st degree assault and a death occurred, he was also found guilty of this. And it is possible because this was not an intentional homicide 2nd degree murder conviction

3rd degree murder - this is a “depraved heart murder” which is basically a reckless homicide. It doesn’t require intent. Only a reckless act. Although this is an inappropriate fact pattern for depraved heart murder even if you accept Chauvin killed Floyd (I don’t). This only exists because it was the conviction in the Noor case and is on appeal to Minnesota Supreme Court.

3
Mythologick 3 points ago +4 / -1

It should have been a Gross Negligence charge at best. Clown fucking World.

And the joggers will still riot because some 15 year old nappy headed WAP got gunned down in Ohio tonight.

3
nightfox02 3 points ago +3 / -0

they were going to add in everything they could. they'd get him for inventing crystal pepsi and any other rap they could dream of in their perverted reality.

all these fake people deifying George Floyd wouldn't give him a glass of water in the Sahara much less open their door for him and let them into their homes.

it's all the libs sucking each others cocks and patting themselves on the back for being 21st century revolutionaries. the kind that glorify behavior that destroys society.

this story doesnt end well for either side. if they think they can keep pushing like this and the meal ticket remains cheap; they are in for surprises.

3
Bogey 3 points ago +3 / -0

The jury gave the prosecutor everything they wanted because social justice demands it.

In 50 years this will be looked back upon much like the acquittal of Till's killers.

2
thatsnotminesir 2 points ago +2 / -0

Its called a "Lesser included offense."

For example, a normal DUI is misdemeanor DUI. But in my state, we have felony aggravated DUI, for when you are DUI with kids in the car or your third DUI in 82 months.

You cannot legally be convicted of both an offense and its lesser included offense, or vice versa. In fact, if an officer made a mistake and charged a person with misdemeanor DUI, when it should have been a felony DUI, and the suspect pleads guilty to the misdemeanor, the felony CANNOT be charged later. It would be double jeapordy.

You cannot legally be convicted of both first AND second degree murder for the same murder, because 2nd degree is a lesser included offense.

It is normal for juries to have the option for convicting the person on either first degree or second degree. The jury instructions normally explain it can only be one or the other, not both.

That clearly didn't happen here. Normally it would be an easy dismissal / retrial on appeal. But with the mob in control, who knows what the appeals court will do.

The law is no longer the basis of the justice system.

2
TJac 2 points ago +3 / -1

Cause used maxi-pad ordered it.

2
traveler776 2 points ago +2 / -0

It's called get whitey, there are no rules

1
tom_machine 1 point ago +1 / -0

You can't They obviously feared for their lives and didn't want to leave a single not guilty stone unturned

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
-1
medicpatriot -1 points ago +2 / -3

He will only be judged on the highest conviction.

2
V2021 2 points ago +2 / -0

Nope. He gets sentenced for all three.

2
medicpatriot 2 points ago +2 / -0

From what I understand, that’s not true. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I have been told by lawyers that the highest murder charge is what he is sentenced on.