• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Chauvin defense raises more reasonable doubt with state witnesses

Dr. Andrew Baker, the chief medical examiner, said Floyd had severe underlying heart disease and an enlarged heart that needed more oxygen than normal to function, as well as narrowing of his coronary arteries.

Meaning heart disease contributed to his death.
Yes, and the other contributor was Chauvin. The thing is that Chauvin was a thinking individual that could change his behavior. The heart cannot change its behavior, meaning that to prevent Floyd's death, all that was needed was for the thinking individual to stop doing what he was doing. He didn't, and therefore he is guilty of being an accessory to murder, which is just as bad as being the reason for the murder.

Those who abet a murder get put in jail like the murderer does.
 
Yes, and the other contributor was Chauvin. The thing is that Chauvin was a thinking individual that could change his behavior.

While we may agree many things contributed to his death, , Chavin included, George's could of changed his behavior, resulting in the police officers not having to restrain a resisting man.
 
While we may agree many things contributed to his death, , Chavin included, George's could of changed his behavior, resulting in the police officers not having to restrain a resisting man.
No, you are wrong because life is all about law and order and the rules that govern that law and order. Chauvin did not follow the rules and then even worse, he did not follow common sense. He had restrained Floyd and had cuffed him. His (Chauvin) life was not at risk and therefore the force used was not proper and certainly not backed by law. He caused the man to die.

We all have illnesses and the laws are clear on what police can do and what they can't and there are also laws that are written to protect those restrained so those illnesses we have are not aggravated by the restraint. Chauvin ignored all of that. He killed that man. His illnesses didn't.
 
While we may agree many things contributed to his death, , Chavin included, George's could of changed his behavior, resulting in the police officers not having to restrain a resisting man.
He is no longer considered resisting once he's in handcuffs. Furthermore, at the time of his arrest, no one even knew if the 20 dollar bill was real or not. The whole incident was excessive force without a doubt. His alleged crime is a misdemeanor. For that he was killed by a crazed police officer and his buddies.

Unless the defense puts on some amazing theatrics this week, the cop is toast. He's already cost the city 27 million dollars. He should go to jail for whatever time his conviction warrants.
 
That does not accurately reflect the charges Chauvin is facing.
In fact the 2nd degree murder charge specifically does not require intent to kill. Instead, the prosecution has to show beyond reasonable doubt that Chauvin caused Floyd's death while assaulting him, i.e. while committing a felony. Still a high burden but nowhere near as high as proving he actually intended to kill him.
Thanks for clarifying.
 
While we may agree many things contributed to his death, , Chavin included, George's could of changed his behavior, resulting in the police officers not having to restrain a resisting man.
Sounds like victim blaming. “The woman wouldn’t have been beaten to death, if she had just laid back and enjoyed the rape.”
 
Dr. Andrew Baker, the chief medical examiner, said Floyd had severe underlying heart disease and an enlarged heart that needed more oxygen than normal to function, as well as narrowing of his coronary arteries.

Meaning heart disease contributed to his death.
Nonsense,
 
Sounds like victim blaming. “The woman wouldn’t have been beaten to death, if she had just laid back and enjoyed the rape.”

Ah, victim blaming...the Democrat go to defence, even though rape or being beaten to death had nothing to do with this case.
 
Nonsense,

Who is this quack?

Rich, who specializes in heart transplant surgery, said Floyd's heart was slightly enlarged but that he had no preexisting heart issue, and so a heart attack was ruled out.

George Floyd had Heart disease. That's why he had enlarged heart. Blocked arteries by 75%.

Andrew Baker is a medical examiner who job is cause of death vs heart transplant surgeon.

Hennepin County's chief medical examiner testified in Derek Chauvin's murder trial Friday that George Floyd's underlying heart disease contributed to his death at the hands of Minneapolis police officers, and that being held down on the street outside Cup Foods was "just more than Mr. Floyd could take."

 
Who is this quack?



George Floyd had Heart disease. That's why he had enlarged heart. Blocked arteries by 75%.

Andrew Baker is a medical examiner who job is cause of death vs heart transplant surgeon.



An experienced and highly qualified is only a "quack" because his testimony is unacceptable to your agenda.
 
An experienced and highly qualified is only a "quack" because his testimony is unacceptable to your agenda.

No, because George had heart disease, while this doctor said he had no pre-existing heart issues.
 

On cross-examination Baker was also specifically asked by Nelson if the prone position was inherently dangerous? His answer was that according to his understanding of medical literature, it was not.

Did it appear to Dr. Baker, based on autopsy, review of all videos, and every other piece of evidence made available to him, that Chauvin’s knee ever occluded Floyd’s carotid artery? It did not.

But even if it had, noted Baker, it would have done so to only the carotid artery on that side of the body, and the non-occluded artery would have continued to carry blood to the brain.

So much for the testimony of the state’s MMA expert bystander witness Williams who had testified under oath that a “blood choke” could be effectively applied by the knee to merely one side of the neck.

Would the placement of Chauvin’s knee have been able anatomically to cut off Floyd’s airway? It would not, answered Baker.

So how again, exactly, did Chauvin’s conduct kill Floyd?

Baker also testified that a factor in his consideration of cause of death was that Floyd had been given CPR and survived until he reached the hospital, only dying there. This testimony directly contradicts that of early state expert witnesses who testified that they could identify the precise moment of Floyd’s death as he lay prone on the street based on police body camera, surveillance, and bystander videos.

My take away from watching the entirety of the testimony of Thomas and Baker was that, like other earlier state expert witnesses, they’d said the magic words the state had called them to say, but then had their credibility and purported certainty profoundly gutted by the defense on cross examination.

Conservatives support crime and killing above all else..........
 
Conservatives support crime and killing above all else..........
only killing black people people though....Wait that's not enough ....only brown-skinned people ....

LAFFRIOT
 
No, because George had heart disease, while this doctor said he had no pre-existing heart issues.
Doesn't matter. Neither heart disease (disputed), nor the small amount of narcotics in his system were the direct cause of death. That was asphyxia brought on by Chauvin.
 

On cross-examination Baker was also specifically asked by Nelson if the prone position was inherently dangerous? His answer was that according to his understanding of medical literature, it was not.

Did it appear to Dr. Baker, based on autopsy, review of all videos, and every other piece of evidence made available to him, that Chauvin’s knee ever occluded Floyd’s carotid artery? It did not.

But even if it had, noted Baker, it would have done so to only the carotid artery on that side of the body, and the non-occluded artery would have continued to carry blood to the brain.

So much for the testimony of the state’s MMA expert bystander witness Williams who had testified under oath that a “blood choke” could be effectively applied by the knee to merely one side of the neck.

Would the placement of Chauvin’s knee have been able anatomically to cut off Floyd’s airway? It would not, answered Baker.

So how again, exactly, did Chauvin’s conduct kill Floyd?

Baker also testified that a factor in his consideration of cause of death was that Floyd had been given CPR and survived until he reached the hospital, only dying there. This testimony directly contradicts that of early state expert witnesses who testified that they could identify the precise moment of Floyd’s death as he lay prone on the street based on police body camera, surveillance, and bystander videos.

My take away from watching the entirety of the testimony of Thomas and Baker was that, like other earlier state expert witnesses, they’d said the magic words the state had called them to say, but then had their credibility and purported certainty profoundly gutted by the defense on cross examination.
The prosecutors destroyed that "expert witness" on cross. Chauvin's going down for the brutal, public execution he committed and no amount of your hatred of black people can change that.
 

or me, the bottom line for Brodd’s testimony as the defense use-of-force expert witness in this trial was to deliver a perfect and coherent use-of-force justification that was largely, if not entirely, invulnerable to substantive damage upon cross-examination by the state.

I know that sounds unrealistic, but I can tell you I’ve seen it done. It was accomplished by the use-of-force expert in the George Zimmerman case, for example.

Because I don’t believe Brodd accomplished that necessary mission, in my view he felt short of requirements for this trial. I’m not certain whether that’s more the fault of Nelson or more the fault of Brodd. I am certain, however, that it is Chauvin who faces paying the price.


As I've brilliantly nd famously stated-- you have to wait to hear everything. That how our justice system is supposed to work
 
nor the small amount of narcotics in his system
'small amount'
Daily Chuckle.

Good thing your not a prosecution witness.
His blood was drawn immediately after death at Hennepin County Medical Center. The official autopsy report shows a concentration of 11 nanograms per milliliter.
How much is that?
Handwritten notes taken when the Medical Examiner briefed prosecutors on his findings suggest it was very high – but not necessarily fatal.
“If he were found dead at home alone and no other apparent causes, this could be acceptable to call an O.D. [Over Dose],” the notes say.

Liberal logic. Small amount ->enough to kill him.
 
'small amount'
Daily Chuckle.

Good thing your not a prosecution witness.
His blood was drawn immediately after death at Hennepin County Medical Center. The official autopsy report shows a concentration of 11 nanograms per milliliter.
How much is that?
Handwritten notes taken when the Medical Examiner briefed prosecutors on his findings suggest it was very high – but not necessarily fatal.
“If he were found dead at home alone and no other apparent causes, this could be acceptable to call an O.D. [Over Dose],” the notes say.

Liberal logic. Small amount ->enough to kill him.
Source please. I get 'access denied' to your link.
 
caught me.

I made it up. He hardly had any fentanyl in his system

Was yesterday a good day or a bad day for the prosecution, d’ya think?
 
Was yesterday a good day or a bad day for the prosecution, d’ya think?
seems like it was a not so good day for the defense according the link from LI which I posted.

I know you're cheerleading a conviction harder than a 17 year old cheering at hs football game but I'm a little more rational than that.

IF they find him guilty, then he gets what he deserves via our legal system
 
On autopsy his heart showed no sign of disease which would have been obvious from scarring of the heart muscles.

Which autopsy? There were three. Blocking of the arteries by 75 percent and enlarged heart, by which your witness acknowledged, should of clued him in even though he seemed to dismiss it.
 
seems like it was a not so good day for the defense according the link from LI which I posted.

I know you're cheerleading a conviction harder than a 17 year old cheering at hs football game but I'm a little more rational than that.

IF they find him guilty, then he gets what he deserves via our legal system

So it was a bad day for the defense then.
 
Chauvin deserves hard time for many years ....... and the law enforcement agency should replace all of the leadership.

PLUS shake down the budget so that significant dollars are supporting new staff that has the capability of "talking down situations" ............. absolutely murder is not allowed.
 
Back
Top Bottom