A Cop Murders a Black Man in America and the (Now Ex) Girlfriend gets to Take the Stand and be Judged by Us

[AFrench2]

- Cop murders George Floyd
- Girlfriend to the (assassinated) Floyd gets to take the stand
- Lawyer asks about her addictions and past issues so that we can treat her like a zoo animal and sit and judge her.

So basically: Don't date a black man. Because he may get murdered and the world will find out about your personal, private issues.

 

[Captain Adverse]

- Cop murders George Floyd

That remains to be determined in a court of law, hence this trial.

- Cop murders George Floyd- Girlfriend to the (assassinated) Floyd gets to take the stand.

Yes, as a PROSECUTION witness. In a fair trial the DEFENSE also gets to cross-examine such witnesses.

Simply watch the entire testimony found here:

- Lawyer asks about her addictions and past issues so that we can treat her like a zoo animal and sit and judge her.

WRONG! The Defense asked her about details she provided regarding her relationship with MR. Floyd and their shared drug use which is a critical element in the case.

Especially when determining if such drug use was a major, if not determining factor in Mr. Floyd's death.

NOTE: After her testimony, guess who notified the Prosecution that he would not testify, citing the 5th Amendment protection against self-incrimination? Why that so-called stalwart "friend" Morries Hall whose testimony was going to rock the Court...thanks to this witness who identified him as the drug dealer who supplied both she and Mr. Floyd. Derek Chauvin Trial: Passenger in George Floyd's Car Pleads the 5th (insider.com)

So basically: Don't date a black man. Because he may get murdered and the world will find out about your personal, private issues.

Wrong again. If you are a witness to an alleged crime, expect to be questioned by BOTH sides, defense and prosecution, and the truth will be required of you.

 

[Tettsuo]

That remains to be determined in a court of law, hence this trial.

Yes, as a PROSECUTION witness. In a fair trial the DEFENSE also gets to cross-examine such witnesses.

Simply watch the entire testimony found here:



WRONG! The Defense asked her about details she provided regarding her relationship with MR. Floyd and their shared drug use which is a critical element in the case.

Especially when determining if such drug use was a major, if not determining factor in Mr. Floyd's death.

NOTE: After her testimony, guess who notified the Prosecution that he would not testify, citing the 5th Amendment protection against self-incrimination? Why that so-called stalwart "friend" Morries Hall whose testimony was going to rock the Court...thanks to this witness who identified him as the drug dealer who supplied both she and Mr. Floyd. Derek Chauvin Trial: Passenger in George Floyd's Car Pleads the 5th (insider.com)

Wrong again. If you are a witness to an alleged crime, expect to be questioned by BOTH sides, defense and prosecution, and the truth will be required of you.

No, it's not. Neither her or Floyd's drug use has anything to do with this trial. Drugs did not kill Floyd, sustained pressure on his body caused his death. This is merely an attempt to smear Floyd with the hope that the jury will think less of Floyd and not care that he was murdered on camera.

 

[gino]

In the US, you are allowed to cross-examine someone who is trying to incriminate you in a crime. What a shame!

 

[AFrench2]

In the US, you are allowed to cross-examine someone who is trying to incriminate you in a crime. What a shame!

What?

 

[Captain Adverse]

No, it's not. Neither her or Floyd's drug use has anything to do with this trial. Drugs did not kill Floyd, sustained pressure on his body caused his death. This is merely an attempt to smear Floyd with the hope that the jury will think less of Floyd and not care that he was murdered on camera.

Hold your horses!

There are several principles involved in a criminal trial, that do not exist in the kangaroo court of Public Opinion, of which YOU are clearly a member.

1. The accused is INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY.

2. The burden of proof rests with the Prosecution.

3. A criminal Defendant has the right to an adequate (preferably good) Defense.

So, one thing that must be shown is the actual FACTUAL cause of death. Thus the Defense not only has the right, but a duty to show alternate causes of death.

It can then be argued that another person in a similar situation, applying the same method of restraint, but NOT dealing with a "victim" having toxic levels of dangerous substances in their system, would not have caused death.

This goes to both criminal intent, and willful indifference, both critical requirements variously applicable to the three charges being tried.

So it is entirely possible that the massive mix of drugs in Mr. Floyd's system, one of which the girlfriend testified was a cause of Mr. Floyd's need to go for emergency care in a prior incident of drug use, WAS the cause of death.

I suggest you let the legal experts involved in the Courtroom process do their respective jobs, and the Judge decide what evidence is or is not admissible.

 

[joko104]

- Cop murders George Floyd
- Girlfriend to the (assassinated) Floyd gets to take the stand
- Lawyer asks about her addictions and past issues so that we can treat her like a zoo animal and sit and judge her.

So basically: Don't date a black man. Because he may get murdered and the world will find out about your personal, private issues.

Wow does your message have a truly negative view of black men!!! I mean it's off the charts.

A lawyer asks a woman about her addictions and past issues means then that must be because she's dating a black man - in YOUR analysis.

Did you lose a daughter, girlfriend or wife to a black man - that then totally ruined her life because that's what you now KNOW black men do to women? What is the source of your message's proactive intense bitterness towards black men?

 

[TurtleDude]

- Cop murders George Floyd
- Girlfriend to the (assassinated) Floyd gets to take the stand
- Lawyer asks about her addictions and past issues so that we can treat her like a zoo animal and sit and judge her.

So basically: Don't date a black man. Because he may get murdered and the world will find out about your personal, private issues.

1) rush to judgment
2) silly race card throwing
3) assuming facts yet to be proven
4) "assassinated"? OH THE DRAMA

 

[AFrench2]

1) rush to judgment
2) silly race card throwing
3) assuming facts yet to be proven
4) "assassinated"? OH THE DRAMA

He was assassinated

 

[TurtleDude]

He was assassinated

bullshit. He was most likely the victim of negligent or perhaps reckless homicide. There is no evidence the police officer intended to kill the man

 

[Old 'N Chill]

bullshit. He was most likely the victim of negligent or perhaps reckless homicide. There is no evidence the police officer intended to kill the man

He was murdered, look at the video and listen to the testimony. He was murdered by that cop, he was already down, cuffed behind his back, and should have been allowed a different postion from there, like on his side so he could breathe. But no, the pig had to kneel on his neck for nine minutes cutting off his air supply until he was dead. There's no mystery here, it is what everyone witnessed, a senseless murder of a black American. I hope justice is served for George Floyd, the cop needs to be convicted and serve time for his killing. Black Lives Matter.

 

[calamity]

- Cop murders George Floyd
- Girlfriend to the (assassinated) Floyd gets to take the stand
- Lawyer asks about her addictions and past issues so that we can treat her like a zoo animal and sit and judge her.

So basically: Don't date a black man. Because he may get murdered and the world will find out about your personal, private issues.

Defense is allowed to try anything short of suborning perjury to save their client.

 

[Bodi]

- Cop murders George Floyd
- Girlfriend to the (assassinated) Floyd gets to take the stand
- Lawyer asks about her addictions and past issues so that we can treat her like a zoo animal and sit and judge her.

So basically: Don't date a black man. Because he may get murdered and the world will find out about your personal, private issues.

Have you dated a black man and had a similar experience?

He was assassinated

Generally, assassins do not calmly sit on a person's neck for 9 minutes, slowly killing them, while people video-tape the assassination.

 

[Bodi]

bullshit. He was most likely the victim of negligent or perhaps reckless homicide. There is no evidence the police officer intended to kill the man

He was murdered, look at the video and listen to the testimony. He was murdered by that cop, he was already down, cuffed behind his back, and should have been allowed a different postion from there, like on his side so he could breathe. But no, the pig had to kneel on his neck for nine minutes cutting off his air supply until he was dead. There's no mystery here, it is what everyone witnessed, a senseless murder of a black American. I hope justice is served for George Floyd, the cop needs to be convicted and serve time for his killing. Black Lives Matter.

Perfect Post!

 

[Bodi]

Defense is allowed to try anything short of suborning perjury to save their client.

I have been watching some video's of killers talking to cops in interrogation rooms on youtube (Casey Anthony, etc.) and I am shocked at how many just blurt out information, make up shit and do not ask for lawyers. ****ing amazing.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

- Cop murders George Floyd
- Girlfriend to the (assassinated) Floyd gets to take the stand
- Lawyer asks about her addictions and past issues so that we can treat her like a zoo animal and sit and judge her.

So basically: Don't date a black man. Because he may get murdered and the world will find out about your personal, private issues.

George Floyd was not murdered.
Her addiction issues are directly relevant because she was engaging in dangerous drugs with Floyd and the evidence all shows Floyd died because of his drug usage.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

No, it's not. Neither her or Floyd's drug use has anything to do with this trial. Drugs did not kill Floyd, sustained pressure on his body caused his death. This is merely an attempt to smear Floyd with the hope that the jury will think less of Floyd and not care that he was murdered on camera.

Drugs absolutely did. The medical examiner said as much on an internal email.
It is literally impossible for the neck hold used by Chauvin to cause death. Completely impossible. Cannot happen.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

bullshit. He was most likely the victim of negligent or perhaps reckless homicide. There is no evidence the police officer intended to kill the man

He was the victim of nothing but his own drug usage.

there is no way your story about being a DOJ prosecutor squares with your claim that using an approved non lethal restraint technique on a non-compliant criminal suspect is negligent homicide.

 

[Logician Man]

Drugs absolutely did. The medical examiner said as much on an internal email.
It is literally impossible for the neck hold used by Chauvin to cause death. Completely impossible. Cannot happen.

Provide the link to the medical examiner's internal email to validate your positive claim, or that positive claim will be dismissed due to inability meet burden of proof. The floor is yours.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Provide the link to the medical examiner's internal email to validate your positive claim, or that positive claim will be dismissed due to inability meet burden of proof. The floor is yours.

If you’re commenting on this thread and don’t know about the email at this point, you are too ignorant to be here. If you’re accusing a man of murder and ignoring vital evidence you are either ignorant or acting with malice. I’m not wasting time on it. You’re not asking in good faith.

 

[Logician Man]

If you’re commenting on this thread and don’t know about the email at this point, you are too ignorant to be here. If you’re accusing a man of murder and ignoring vital evidence you are either ignorant or acting with malice. I’m not wasting time on it. You’re not asking in good faith.

Your positive claim, not surprisingly, is summarily dismissed due to inability to meet your Burden of Proof. The rest of the irrelevant drivel is duly noted, and ignored.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Your positive claim, not surprisingly, is summarily dismissed due to inability to meet your Burden of Proof.

Blah blah blah blah. You could’ve found the email with a quick Google search in the time it took you to act silly with your inane posts.

 

[Logician Man]

Blah blah blah blah. You could’ve found the email with a quick Google search in the time it took you to act silly with your inane posts.

Your positive claim. Your responsibility to meet burden of proof. ( debating 101 )

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Your positive claim. Your responsibility to meet burden of proof. ( debating 101 )

You’re not engaging in debate. You’re engaging in sophistry. I don’t do links anymore. Never in 7 years has anyone I’ve “debated” ever read the any link I’ve provided.

If you’re insisting emails within the coroners office doesn’t exist it’s because you’re ignorant and refuse to do your own research. I cannot help you if you do not wish to be informed.

 

[Logician Man]

You’re not engaging in debate. You’re engaging in sophistry. I don’t do links anymore. Never in 7 years has anyone I’ve “debated” ever read the any link I’ve provided.

If you’re insisting emails within the coroners office doesn’t exist it’s because you’re ignorant and refuse to do your own research. I cannot help you if you do not wish to be informed.

I'm not 'claiming' anything. I'm simply requesting you link your positive claim, per 'accepted debating protocol 101.'