The Derek Chauvin Trial

garyt1957 said:
Actually it's a HUGE difference in the eyes of the law. If Floyd died from a heart condition that Chauvin couldn't know he had you certainly can't convict him of 2nd degree murder. Maybe manslaughter at best. If it was asphyxiation you can now bring 2nd degree into the conversatiand they knelt on him on the ground for 9+minutes s they did
Click to expand...
I disagree. The medical testimony has been consistent all the way through that the way in which Mr. Floyd was handled and knelt upon by the police officers was what caused him to die. Doesn't matter what they knew or didn't know. The cause of his death was the actions of the police officers, Chauvin in particular. I believe it was Dr. Barker that testified that that amount of compression of Mr. Floyd's body for as long as it lasted would have killed almost anybody, no matter how fit or healthy.
 
Last edited:
Butterfly said:
I disagree. The medical testimony has been consistent all the way through that the way in which Mr. Floyd was handled and knelt upon by the police officers was what caused him to die. Doesn't matter what they knew or didn't know. The cause of his death was the actions of the police officers, Chauvin in particular. I believe it was Dr. Barker that testified that that amount of compression of Mr. Floyd's body for as long as it lasted would have killed almost anybody, no matter how fit or healthy.
Click to expand...
Absolutely agree!!!
 

ohioboy said:
Would you resist an UNlawful arrest?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't resist any arrest. In this country we have a system in place for such things. I would go along with the arrest, hire an attorney , and sort it all out in the system.

Then ....... If I really felt I had a good case , and my attorney said we can prove it ? I might sue .

Resisting/fighting with the police @ the time of the arrest is about the dumbest thing anyone can do.
 
ohioboy said:
I remember that Win, it was "cold blooded murder". The man was fleeing on foot from a simple traffic stop, he posed no harm to anyone if permitted to escape.
Click to expand...

There is no way the officer could have known what he may or may not have done. @ that time, that is determined after capture/arrest.

A 'sensible' person would not run from a simple traffic stop. A 'street-wise' officer knows this. Part of his job is to get the criminals off the street / stop the offender........Well he did.

The minute the guy bolted ......... He killed himself.
 
rgp said:
There is no way the officer could have known what he may or may not have done. @ that time, that is determined after capture/arrest.

A 'sensible' person would not run from a simple traffic stop. A 'street-wise' officer knows this. Part of his job is to get the criminals off the street / stop the offender........Well he did.

The minute the guy bolted ......... He killed himself.
Click to expand...

The FACTS BEFORE the man fled determine the use of deadly force: Tennessee v, Garner.
 
ohioboy said:
The FACTS BEFORE the man fled determine the use of deadly force: Tennessee v, Garner.
Click to expand...

Well you can certainly agree with that, and attach your opinion to it.

I do not, and i stand by my opinion.

And just how was the officer supposed to obtain these facts ? If the suspect runs at the first sign of possible capture ?
 
rgp said:
Well you can certainly agree with that, and attach your opinion to it.

I do not, and i stand by my opinion.

And just how was the officer supposed to obtain these facts ? If the suspect runs at the first sign of possible capture ?
Click to expand...

The officer was found guilty of murder, must not have been believed if he made any statements to the effect of a fleeing danger to society?
 
rgp said:
I wouldn't resist any arrest. In this country we have a system in place for such things. I would go along with the arrest, hire an attorney , and sort it all out in the system.

Then ....... If I really felt I had a good case , and my attorney said we can prove it ? I might sue .

Resisting/fighting with the police @ the time of the arrest is about the dumbest thing anyone can do.
Click to expand...
You are correct; resisting arrest is the dumbest thing anyone can do.
And, once a suspect is handcuffed, choking him until he dies is the most criminal thing anyone can do.
 
rgp said:
There is no way the officer could have known what he may or may not have done. @ that time, that is determined after capture/arrest.

A 'sensible' person would not run from a simple traffic stop. A 'street-wise' officer knows this. Part of his job is to get the criminals off the street / stop the offender........Well he did.

The minute the guy bolted ......... He killed himself.
Click to expand...
Why didn't you testify in the officer's defense? You could have saved him 20 years.
 
rgp said:
No one 'choked' anyone.
Click to expand...
41195792-9427987-Chauvin_was_seen_with_his_hands_around_Floyd_s_neck_in_never_bef-a-171_1617327163131.jpg
 
rgp said:
I wouldn't resist any arrest. In this country we have a system in place for such things. I would go along with the arrest, hire an attorney , and sort it all out in the system.

Then ....... If I really felt I had a good case , and my attorney said we can prove it ? I might sue .

Resisting/fighting with the police @ the time of the arrest is about the dumbest thing anyone can do.
Click to expand...

How do you define arrest under OHIO law?
 
fuzzybuddy said:
I don't think the trial is about Floyd. The trial is about a guy, who knelt on another person's neck, which caused the death of that person. What Floyd did to get arrested is not relevant. He was, and handcuffed. People are reading all kinds of things into the death of Floyd racism, police brutality, drugs, crime, the thin Blue Line, etc. It's about a guy, who knelt on another person's neck, which caused the death of that person.
Click to expand...
Yes, and it's a pity that the victim was black because it has been turned into a racist crime, whereas in fact, the mans colour might have no relevance at all.
 
Would someone on here please PM me when the trial is over? I'm hoping to score a large screen TV from Wally's when the riots start...
 
ohioboy said:
I was looking for a better answer, like a legal citation. Carry on.
Click to expand...

Maybe ask a better question, as I just do not understand what you are seeking. An arrest is an arrest. Ohio or anywhere they [should] be the same. If I am mistaken please inform me.

That said, if a police officer says you are / I am under arrest, then just comply, and sort it out through the legal system. That is the safe way, and if one is innocent, he/she will prevail.
 

Back
Top