Bad day for the Prosecution in Chauvin trial

[calamity]

LAFFRIOT

I know you're fraught with worry that Chauvin isn't going to get away with killing a black man.

I know, right.

 

[Linuxcooldude]

Prosecution's case is falling apart, by helping the defence. The defence with some of the prosecution's witnesses are spending more time with them is telling.

 

[Callen]

the safety of the scene, and that the MPD policy actually requires that it first be safe for the officer to provide care before the officer has the duty to provide that care."

There was ample time for the officers to take additional steps to ensure their safety. They neglected to do several things per-protocol including tethering his legs. It will be hard for rational people to buy into the fact that four armed officers, with guns tasers and mace, were in fear for their safety.

This, of course, fundamentally undercuts the prosecution’s narrative of guilt that it was Chauvin’s knee on Floyd’s neck that killed Floyd."

Maybe you should stop reading lw talking points and actually go by the evidence

That picture was taken after EMS had arrived and, as per Yiprevious testimony, Chauvin had adjusted his position so the EMS could check for a pulse. I believe the previous testimony from EMS was that they either sad something to Chauvin or nudged him. The jury is not going to be fooled by that one!!!

 

[Callen]

The defence with some of the prosecution's witnesses are spending more time with them is telling

Except 90% of it has zero to do with the specifics of this case. However, I am getting a bit worried over the verdict. Chauvin only needs one " Linuxcoodude" on the jury and he walks.

 

[Linuxcooldude]

Except 90% of it has zero to do with the specifics of this case. However, I am getting a bit worried over the verdict. Chauvin only needs one " Linuxcoodude" on the jury and he walks.

All the Prosecution, er, I mean Defence, has to do is cast reasonable doubt which is doing it in spades.

 

[KLATTU]

Except 90% of it has zero to do with the specifics of this case. However, I am getting a bit worried over the verdict. Chauvin only needs one " Linuxcoodude" on the jury and he walks.

Another liberal outs themselves.

" GUILTY! "

"But what about a fair trial?"
" I saw the tape, nothing else matters."

 

[TheParser]

Let's tell it as it is.

Every day is a GOOD day for the prosecution.

Dang! We are not idiots.

We know that the fix is in.

This trial is as fair as a trial is in, say, China.

The Harris administration knows that there MUST be a guilty verdict.

It does not want to be embarrassed by massive riots that would occur otherwise.

 

[Callen]

has to do is cast reasonable doubt which is doing it in spades.

Maybe in your deck of cards but certainly not in mine. Very little they have offered 9on cross has to do with this case, it is mostly generalities. However, like I said, it just takes one who thinks as you do and Chauvin walks.

 

[Linuxcooldude]

That picture was taken after EMS had arrived and, as per Yiprevious testimony, Chauvin had adjusted his position so the EMS could check for a pulse. I believe the previous testimony from EMS was that they either sad something to Chauvin or nudged him. The jury is not going to be fooled by that one!!!

Ironic that another states witness Mercil, use of force training expert, testified that he himself had also physically restrained a suspect until EMS arrived. Even though the Prosecution for a week testified it was a misconduct for Chauvin to do so.

 

[The AntiDonald]

I feel this is the part of police protocol that needs to change however... if they have the guy cuffed on the ground laying front down, there really is no need to put your knee on his neck when he is struggling to breathe.

not saying chauvin was guilty, thats for the jury to decide. just that they really need to take a look at this type of restraining someone if it is a standard thing.

Many of the police officers including the chief testified that it was NOT a standard thing. Chauvin, IMHO, is guilty of murder and his cop buddies are guilty of accessory to murder.

 

[bongsaway]

Chauvin Trial Day 8 Wrap-Up: “I Ate Too Many Drugs” Video May Be Game-Changer

Once again the defense weaponizes prosecution 'expert' witnesses against the prosecution case.

legalinsurrection.com

Then Nelson scored what many may perceive to be an important point, albeit I’m rather ambivalent about this one. Nelson played a short piece of video in which Floyd is prone on the street, and speaking in his muttering fashion.

What’s Floyd saying there, asked Nelson? Is he saying “I ate too many drugs”? Stiger answers he can’t tell.

No worries, Nelson is happy to play it again for Stiger. And the jury.

Stiger is still unsure if that’s what Floyd was saying, and Nelson lets it go—but the jury has heard the suggestion.

Later in the day, with a different witness, BCA Special Agent Reyerson, whose testimony I won’t spend much time on because it was so boring, Nelson would play the same video, and ask the same question. This time, the witness will agree—yes, Reyerson answers, it sounds like “I ate too many drugs” to m


Ka. Boom.

So damaging was this Reyerson testimony for the state that they actually re-called Reyerson as a witness for the sole reason of having him listen again, and give a different answer. Oh, now, says Reyerson the second, now it sounds like “I didn’t take no drugs.”

Well, OK. As I said, I’m ambivalent about Floyd’s statement on the merits, because I sure can’t understand what he’s actually saying. Although it must be said Nelson’s version will certainly appear reasonable to a jury that’s been exposed to the toxicology report on Floyd.

But in terms of legal strategy by the defense, this was brilliant. Not only did Nelson plant that seed in the jury’s mind that Floyd had eaten too many drugs and knew it, he got to play the audio for Stiger not once, but twice.

And then again a third time, for Reyerson.

And then the state itself played it for the jury a fourth time!

Amazing.

Your prejudice is showing.

 

[Callen]

had also physically restrained a suspect until EMS arrived.

Again non-specific and certainly not specific to this case. What were the circumstances? The jury is smarter than to be swayed by statements like that which have ZERO to do with this case and especially when the defence didn't ask for any details of that incident.

 

[Linuxcooldude]

Again non-specific and certainly not specific to this case. What were the circumstances? The jury is smarter than to be swayed by statements like that which have ZERO to do with this case and especially when the defence didn't ask for any details of that incident.

Which does not make it uncommon to restrain a suspect until paramedics arrive. Which, don't forget, comes from a use of force training expert. Not only that, but a prosecution witness agreed that Chavin could of used more excessive force to subdue Floyd rather than restraining him, like a tazer.

"The defense asked Jody Stiger, a Los Angeles Police Department sergeant and use-of-force expert for the prosecution, whether Chauvin could have used a Taser when he saw Floyd resisting being put in the back of a police car. Stiger agreed that based on the department’s use-of-force continuum, officers are within their right to use a Taser on a subject who is actively resisting."

 

[KLATTU]

Yes basically

Your prejudice is showing.

Talking to the mirror again?
LAFFRIOT

" GUILTY! "

"But what about a fair trial?"
" I saw the tape, nothing else matters."

 

[snakestretcher]

Another bad prosecution witness

MINNEAPOLIS VS. THE EVIDENCE - Ann Coulter

Apparently, no one is watching the trial of Derek Chauvin, the former Minneapolis police officer on trial for the murder of George Floyd. Otherwise, the media couldn’t get away with their spectacular…

anncoulter.com

"My favorite witness — and the media’s favorite, too! — was Genevieve Hansen, Feminist Hero. She appeared in court in her firefighter dress uniform and a belligerent mood — though not as belligerent as the day Floyd died, when she showed up in sweats and began shrieking at the officers.

The headlines are along the lines of “Firefighter: I Could Have Saved Floyd’s Life, But Police Wouldn’t Let Me.”

Yes, apparently, Genevieve would have invented a time machine, gone back, and stopped Floyd from ingesting three times the lethal dose of fentanyl. I take it back: Chubby girls make the best firefighters! (Don’t get snippy with me: It’s beyond outrageous that fire departments have abandoned all physical fitness requirements solely in order to hire more women.)

According to Genevieve, the police on the scene unaccountably refused to step aside and take direction from her, despite her full ONE YEAR of experience as a firefighter.

Genevieve was totally on top of the situation. In her statement to investigators shortly after the event, she described Floyd as a “small, slim man.” Floyd was at least 6-foot-4 and weighed 230 pounds. The largest police officer on the scene was Chauvin, coming in at 5-foot-9 and 140 pounds. Genevieve missed nothing!

Even in the calm setting of a courtroom, with no agitated bystanders yelling at her, here are the things Genevieve says she would have done to save Floyd’s life!

In order:

1. “I would have requested additional help.”
2. “I would have wanted someone to call 911.”

3. “I would have asked someone to run to the gas station and look for an AED [a defibrillator].

Why didn’t the officers think to call for medical backup??? Oh yeah, they already had. Twice. Starting about 10 minutes before Genevieve even showed up.

1. “I would have checked his airway.”
2. “I would have been worried about a spinal cord injury.”

Why didn’t the officers think to call for medical backup??? Oh yeah, they already had. Twice. Starting about 10 minutes before Genevieve even showed up.

1. “I would have checked his airway.”
2. “I would have been worried about a spinal cord injury.”

As we know from the autopsy, there was no problem with Floyd’s airway or spinal cord. (But, as long as you bring it up, his body did contain three times the lethal dose of fentanyl.)

1. “I would have checked for a pulse.”

Eureka! Why didn’t — oh wait, the officers had done this, repeatedly, as several bystander witnesses had already confirmed.

By now, Floyd was dead. That’s when she would have started chest compressions.

So Genevieve, the state’s star witness on what the cops did wrong, testified that she would have done pretty much everything the officers did. But she would have been a lot bossier about it.

As much as Genevieve’s one year with the fire department made her an expert on when a police officer should begin chest compressions, the Minneapolis Police Department’s own experts directly contradicted her this week. These were, again, prosecution witnesses."

She stated nothing of the sort. She clearly stated that she was prevented from assisting Floyd despite repeated requests and being ignored while watching Floyd die.

Off-duty firefighter called 911 when police refused to let her treat George Floyd

Genevieve Hansen said she was ‘worried’ about safety of Black witnesses at hands of police after George Floyd incident

www.independent.co.uk

Are you sure you were watching the same trial?

 

[SNOWFLAKE]

HERE WE GO AGAIN!

A black man had drugs in his system, so it is HIS fault he died.

Question: would he have died if a knee was not pressed down on his neck for 9 minutes?

And EVERY expert brought up to the stand on procedures agrees that once handcuffed kneeling on the neck like that of a perp is NOT necessary.

The lawyer is weak, all he has is "suggestions" and I bet anyone on the jury is going to get annoyed with him in an awful hurry with his snide "suggestions".

If I was the prosecutor I would simply put the defense lawyer on the stand and ask him "Are you sure Floyd would have died if Chauvin had not pressed his knee on his neck?" AND watch the prosecutor try to squirm out of that one.

Courts don't deal in "speculation" but evidence, but the Chauvin apologists on here have to try to find SOMETHING, please ANYTHING, to excuse his behavior.

And don't be fooled folks, this kind of commentary is based on skin color, had Floyd been white and the cop black, the same excuse makers would be asking for Chauvin to fry.

 

[Callen]

Stiger agreed that based on the department’s use-of-force continuum, officers are within their right to use a Taser on a subject who is actively resisting."

If he really felt for his safety, and that of the other three armed officers, why didn't he do that instead of placing his knee on Floyd's throat for over 9 minutes?

 

[bongsaway]

Yes basically

Talking to the mirror again?
LAFFRIOT

" GUILTY! "

"But what about a fair trial?"
" I saw the tape, nothing else matters."

Plenty have seen videos of the incident. Now it's up to the defense attorney to convince the jurors to not believe their lying eyes. The defense attorney planted a seed of doubt and you bought it.

 

[Callen]

This trial is as fair as a trial is in, say, China.

The Harris administration knows that there MUST be a guilty verdict.

It does not want to be embarrassed by massive riots that would occur otherwise.

Would you care to explain how it is you think Harris can reach down and control the prosecution, defence, the witnesses and the jury? Or is this just something you heard on RW media?

 

[SNOWFLAKE]

So, if you have taken too many drugs, it's OK for a police officer to kneel on your neck until you choke to death?

that is the message here, pretty sick isn't it?

 

[bongsaway]

Maybe in your deck of cards but certainly not in mine. Very little they have offered 9on cross has to do with this case, it is mostly generalities. However, like I said, it just takes one who thinks as you do and Chauvin walks.

I notice most of the folks who think the police are innocent are also racists so of course the black guy is guilty.

 

[Linuxcooldude]

If he really felt for his safety, and that of the other three armed officers, why didn't he do that instead of placing his knee on Floyd's throat for over 9 minutes?

That would be in addition too, not in lieu of...the idea is to use a taser to have George stop resisting arrest so they can subdue him.

 

[snakestretcher]

Let's not forget that both autopsies confirmed that Floyd's death was due to asphyxiation, not from any narcotics in his system.

 

[tres borrachos]

Let's tell it as it is.

Every day is a GOOD day for the prosecution.

Dang! We are not idiots.

We know that the fix is in.

This trial is as fair as a trial is in, say, China.

The Harris administration knows that there MUST be a guilty verdict.

It does not want to be embarrassed by massive riots that would occur otherwise.

There is no Harris administration involved in this trial. There is no Harris administration. There is no limit to the stupid things you post.

 

[lwf]

Chauvin Trial Day 8 Wrap-Up: “I Ate Too Many Drugs” Video May Be Game-Changer

Once again the defense weaponizes prosecution 'expert' witnesses against the prosecution case.

legalinsurrection.com

Then Nelson scored what many may perceive to be an important point, albeit I’m rather ambivalent about this one. Nelson played a short piece of video in which Floyd is prone on the street, and speaking in his muttering fashion.

What’s Floyd saying there, asked Nelson? Is he saying “I ate too many drugs”? Stiger answers he can’t tell.

No worries, Nelson is happy to play it again for Stiger. And the jury.

Stiger is still unsure if that’s what Floyd was saying, and Nelson lets it go—but the jury has heard the suggestion.

Later in the day, with a different witness, BCA Special Agent Reyerson, whose testimony I won’t spend much time on because it was so boring, Nelson would play the same video, and ask the same question. This time, the witness will agree—yes, Reyerson answers, it sounds like “I ate too many drugs” to m


Ka. Boom.

So damaging was this Reyerson testimony for the state that they actually re-called Reyerson as a witness for the sole reason of having him listen again, and give a different answer. Oh, now, says Reyerson the second, now it sounds like “I didn’t take no drugs.”

Well, OK. As I said, I’m ambivalent about Floyd’s statement on the merits, because I sure can’t understand what he’s actually saying. Although it must be said Nelson’s version will certainly appear reasonable to a jury that’s been exposed to the toxicology report on Floyd.

But in terms of legal strategy by the defense, this was brilliant. Not only did Nelson plant that seed in the jury’s mind that Floyd had eaten too many drugs and knew it, he got to play the audio for Stiger not once, but twice.

And then again a third time, for Reyerson.

And then the state itself played it for the jury a fourth time!

Amazing.

Right. Because "I ate too many drugs!" makes way more sense for someone to be screaming while being pinned by four police officers than, oh, I don't know, maybe "I ain't do any drugs!"