(April 20, 2021 at 5:51 pm)Irreligious Atheist Wrote: I did think Chauvin was very likely/ most probably one of the main causes of Floyd's death. I did see some room for doubt though. He didn't die of an overdose. He died of Hypoxia though and fentanyl can cause hypoxia.

This is bullshit. Long ago I saw a case on TV where an old man murdered his wife and burried her in the basement. After all and said and done, if the dipshit had not done what he did, she would have died from cancer a few months later.

All the medical experts agreed in the Floyd trial, said that no matter what afflictions or addictions Floyd had, he would not have died that day, if it were not for the interaction of police.

If a bank robber walks into a bank, not knowing any of the tellers, and even without a gun, but hand the teller a note that he has a gun, even though he does not, and does not know the health of the teller, does it matter that she dies from the stress due to underlying compliations? Would that teller have died, if that asshole had not scared the shit out of her with a note?

I could give a shit less what Chauvid's intent was. He was in a position of power, and he failed to lend aid when it was needed. And he had almost 10 minutes to adjust his behavior, AND HE DID NOT!

Chauvin was on a power trip.

Chauvin is exactly where he should be.

(April 20, 2021 at 5:52 pm)arewethereyet Wrote:

(April 20, 2021 at 5:51 pm)Irreligious Atheist Wrote: I did think Chauvin was very likely/ most probably one of the main causes of Floyd's death. I did see some room for doubt though. He didn't die of an overdose. He died of Hypoxia though and fentanyl can cause hypoxia.

...especially if a grown man is kneeling on your neck.

The fact that he failed to monitor for signs of life, much less safety, during prolong constraint meant to debilitate Floyd, and remain kneeling on Floyd’s neck initial several minutes after Floyd is dead makes him morally guilty of reckless manslaughter even if Floyd died of completely natural causes.

---

(April 21, 2021 at 4:06 pm)Angrboda Wrote:

(April 21, 2021 at 3:29 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: No, it doesn’t, because his death did not occur while he was resisting arrest.

Boru

What happened in the minutes before Chauvin applied lethal force does change one's understanding of the events of that day.  But your politically correct smear is noted.  Now fuck off.

Which part is the smear?

Floyd was dead, or at a minumum brain dead, before he was put into the ambulance.

The micro elecrtric atictivity noted in the ER is after the fact. Medically speaking anyone watching all the videos, even the police body cams admitting he had no pulse, were minutes BEFORE the ambulance showed up. And the general rule with lack of cpr within the first 4 minutes, is that if you dont rivive bloodflow or oxygen to the brain, the longer delayed the more brian damage.

EVEN IF Floyd had been rivived 10 or 20 minutes later to the point where his heart was acting on it's own, microsopically , he would have been brain dead.

Judging the video everyone saw, from the time he stopped moving and speaking, to the time his limp body was flopped onto the stretcher to be put into the ambulance, he was beyond merely being passed out. He was dead, and any micro electricity noted after was not going to constitute full cognative life without harm. He was dead 7 minutes into the event. 

The video shows the time of practial death, the ER merely exhausted all legal measures, but the truth is Floyd was dead on the street.

(April 21, 2021 at 8:55 pm)Anomalocaris Wrote:

(April 21, 2021 at 4:06 pm)Angrboda Wrote: What happened in the minutes before Chauvin applied lethal force does change one's understanding of the events of that day.  But your politically correct smear is noted.  Now fuck off.

Which part is the smear?

First of all, it's literally true that Floyd's resisting arrest as opposed to not resisting arrest did change things. To assert otherwise is patently stupid. Even Boru doesn't believe that if Floyd had meekly complied and gotten in the car that Chauvin would still have dragged him out of the car and kneeled on his neck. So Boru suggesting it didn't change anything because he didn't die while resisting is absurd if one takes it literally. So what was Boru's meaning? My suspicion is that Boru was saying that Floyd shouldn't have died as a consequence of resisting arrest, and I agree with him there, it shouldn't have changed whether Floyd lived or died. But if that's what he meant, then by saying he disagreed with me, he's implying that I said otherwise, that Floyd's resisting arrest should have led to his death. I think I'm within reason at being offended by any such suggestion. If you have another theory of Boru's meaning, please share it.

So, were you not aware that he was initially resisting arrest? Because that’s been a matter of public record for months. How exactly did watching that part change your perspective on the case? I legit want to know, because, so far, Your explanation really hasn’t been much of an explanation.

There is room for debate on how much the disproportionate and somewhat unprofessional response of a botched take-down outweighed the risk of a large man demonstrably on drugs with a history of armed violence against a pregnant woman.

What is clear and somewhat harder to debate is the intent. Chauvin did not wake up that morning intending to kill anyone and there is no evidence he ever intended to kill anyone in his life. This is grounds for manslaughter, third degree murder at most.
If you disagree with this you must demonstrate he is guilty of intending to murder Floyd as opposed to gross incompetence in the carrying out of his duty.

(April 22, 2021 at 4:48 am)Reforged Wrote: There is room for debate on how much the disproportionate and somewhat unprofessional response of a botched take-down outweighed the risk of a large man demonstrably on drugs with a history of armed violence against a pregnant woman.

What is clear and somewhat harder to debate is the intent. Chauvin did not wake up that morning intending to kill anyone and there is no evidence he ever intended to kill anyone in his life. This is grounds for manslaughter, third degree murder at most.
If you disagree with this you must demonstrate he is guilty of intending to murder Floyd as opposed to gross incompetence in the carrying out of his duty.

It wasn't merely "botched", it was intentional. It isn't a matter of Chauvin waking up hours before to begin his shift and say" I get to kill someone today". It was however intentional that he had the mindset of "I am a cop, obey me."

Doesn't matter, I guess Ill have to say this every page now. Murder in the second doesn't require intent. All that had to be demonstrated was that he caused a persons death in the process of committing a felony.

Assaulting a person is a felony, even if they're a bad person, even if you're a cop.

(April 22, 2021 at 4:56 am)The Grand Nudger Wrote: Doesn't matter, I guess Ill have to say this every page now.  Murder in the second doesn't require intent.  All that had to be demonstrated was that he caused a persons death in the process of committing a felony.

Assaulting a person is a felony, even if they're a bad person, even if you're a cop.

Everyone can bitch about Chauvin as an individual, but the truth has been for decades that our policing and oversight is lacking and too much abuse is tollerated in the "interest" of policing. It isn't enough to arrest and convict him. Our policing system needs reform nationwide.

Fat chance of that when society can witlessly assert that a person is definitely guilty but shouldn't do the time.

Chauvin was found guilty of causing the death of a man through extreme recklessness in the process of committing assualt. AKA, exactly what everyone's lying eyes saw on a ten minute long snuff film.