• 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 Seeks New Trial, Alleges Prosecutorial & Jury Misconduct

BlueTex said:
Is that what you expect them to argue in this motion? That the he should get a new trial because they are incompetent? 😛
Click to expand...
reminds me of the (fictional) story where the jury announces "Your Honour, we find the defendant guilty, but would like to add that we're not crazy about the plaintiff either".

Perry Mason on laughing gas.:ROFLMAO:

If, that is, you're old enough to remember.;)
 
Fletch said:
I didnt say Chauvin had to prove his innocence. I said he had to explain his actions. He didnt, probably because he couldnt. Thats why he was convicted.
Click to expand...
One is always supposed to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. That wasn't the case here. He was absolutely required to prove his innocence.
 
Tahuyaman said:
One is always supposed to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. That wasn't the case here. He was absolutely required to prove his innocence.
Click to expand...

A JURY found him guilty.. overturning the verdict of a jury is not some small hurdle
 
BlueTex said:
This motion is filed by his CURRENT attorneys... There will be a hearing on this motion within 30 days... Are you suggesting that he will fire his counsel before the hearing?
Click to expand...
Where do you get this notion that I was suggesting anything other than I believe his defense team is incompetent? I neve once suggested or even hinted that he will fire them. You continue to translate things in an odd way
 
Fletch said:
I am a Trump supporter and I dont support Chauvin. So much for your stupid theory.
Click to expand...

I said those who supported Chauvin were trump supporters. Not all trump.supporters support Chauvin. Can you see the difference.

Still pretty embarrassing to.admit you are a trump supporter. Is it because you are rich or racist. I would guess you are not racist because you say you don't support Chauvin.
 
BlueTex said:
A JURY found him guilty.. overturning the verdict of a jury is not some small hurdle
Click to expand...
A jury found him guilty. Duh.

I'm saying that in this case the defendent went to trial not having the luxury of being presumed innocent.
 
rickc said:
I said those who supported Chauvin were trump supporters. Not all trump.supporters support Chauvin. Can you see the difference.

Still pretty embarrassing to.admit you are a trump supporter. Is it because you are rich or racist. I would guess you are not racist because you say you don't support Chauvin.
Click to expand...
Yep. The race card. Jeebus.
 
Tahuyaman said:
One is always supposed to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. That wasn't the case here. He was absolutely required to prove his innocence.
Click to expand...
Nope, the prosecution was required to prove his guilt and in that succeeded.
 
Fletch said:
He wont get a new trial, nor should he. He was convicted because he never produced a defense of his actions. He needed to explain why it was he kneeled on the neck of a man cuffed and laying face down in the street long after the guy had passed out. Unless you believe Floyd would have died in the back seat of the cruiser (had they gotten him in there) then you can only conclude that Chavins actions contributed to Floyds death. The jury found him guilty based upon the evidence they heard and no matter how many times he stands trial, the outcome will be the same.
Click to expand...
Whether or not Chauvins actions contributed to Floyd’s death was never relevant. The use of force was justified and Floyd due to his own decision made himself vulnerable to death from a level of force that was very light.

I don’t know what kind wuss thinks the force used against Floyd was excessive.
 
Chagos said:
Nope, the prosecution was required to prove his guilt and in that succeeded.
Click to expand...
They were, but still Chauvin went went to trial without the presumption of innocence. That's pretty much basic common sense.
 
Chagos said:
Nope, the prosecution was required to prove his guilt and in that succeeded.
Click to expand...
They really didn’t.

Instead they assigned 12 attorneys to drown the defense in motions, put on questionable witnesses, their allies engaged in a campaign of political terrorism including flying a congresswoman from California to threaten violence if the verdict wasn’t what they wanted
 
EMNofSeattle said:
Whether or not Chauvins actions contributed to Floyd’s death was never relevant. The use of force was justified and Floyd due to his own decision made himself vulnerable to death from a level of force that was very light.

I don’t know what kind wuss thinks the force used against Floyd was excessive.
Click to expand...
Even when the use of force is justified, it can be applied in the wrong way. Chauvin employed force in the wrong way.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
Whether or not Chauvins actions contributed to Floyd’s death was never relevant. The use of force was justified and Floyd due to his own decision made himself vulnerable to death from a level of force that was very light.

I don’t know what kind wuss thinks the force used against Floyd was excessive.
Click to expand...

Pretty cowardly to choke a man to death with his hands tied behind his back
 
Tahuyaman said:
Even when the use of force is justified, it can be applied in the wrong way. Chauvin employed force in the wrong way.
Click to expand...
No he didn’t.

This is the problem with our modern society of low T and contraception. We’re filled with wussies who think a very low level of non violent force against a non compliant suspect was somehow “wrong”

Nothing Chauvin did was wrong. That exact hold was trained by the police department, has never been proved to cause a death, and was properly applied.
 
rickc said:
Pretty cowardly to choke a man to death with his hands tied behind his back
Click to expand...
Floyd was not choked. All the medical testimony pretty much proves that whatever you think happened choking was absolutely not it.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
No he didn’t.

This is the problem with our modern society of low T and contraception. We’re filled with wussies who think a very low level of non violent force against a non compliant suspect was somehow “wrong”

Nothing Chauvin did was wrong. That exact hold was trained by the police department, has never been proved to cause a death, and was properly applied.
Click to expand...
He used the wrong restraint method. It was not properly applied. The only real argument should have been the severity of the charge he faced.
 
Tahuyaman said:
They were, but still Chauvin went went to trial without the presumption of innocence. That's pretty much basic common sense.
Click to expand...
Holding oneself to be a mind reader and common sense pretty much rule each other out.

THAT is common sense applied.
 
Tahuyaman said:
He used the wrong restraint method. It was not properly applied. The only real argument should have been the severity of the charge he faced.
Click to expand...
My advice (all two cents of it) would be not to react to posters serving mere bait.

That's why I've stopped responding to him long ago.
 
Chagos said:
Holding oneself to be a mind reader and common sense pretty much rule each other out.

THAT is common sense applied.
Click to expand...
It’s obvious that there was no presumption of innocence with Chauvin. I’m sure a lot of people are fine with that too.
 
Tahuyaman said:
It’s obvious that there was no presumption of innocence with Chauvin. I’m sure a lot of people are fine with that too.
Click to expand...
When somebody starts a claim with "It's obvious that..............", I can't help but grin.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom