Chauvin Trial

I mean initially they are pissed, no doubt, but then you see the uniform, combine that with his compliance and where does the situation require pepper spray? if I'm the officer there, knowing what I know is a tense situation w/police and civilian relations. I order him out of vehicle because he doesn't want to reach,pat him down, ask where lic. and reg is, have him take a seat on curb, retrieve the paperwork myself in glovebox, tell him to get back in vehicle, run the usual checks, hand him his shit back, tell him what he did was suspicious but I understand, have a good night thanks for your service,end of story

CCGNZ said:

I mean initially they are pissed, no doubt, but then you see the uniform, combine that with his compliance and where does the situation require pepper spray? if I'm the officer there, knowing what I know is a tense situation w/police and civilian relations. I order him out of vehicle because he doesn't want to reach,pat him down, ask where lic. and reg is, have him take a seat on curb, retrieve the paperwork myself in glovebox, tell him to get back in vehicle, run the usual checks, hand him his shit back, tell him what he did was suspicious but I understand, have a good night thanks for your service,end of story

Click to expand...

Those police were acting in a manner that you would think they pulled over 2-3 black men wearing gang attire with a shooting reported a mile or two away 30 minutes ago.ccguns

mooray said:

Fear aggression. As society worsens, so will police aggression.

Click to expand...

"blame society"????

It's cops who are causing the fear through their aggression. People like you are why they get away with it.

CCGNZ said:

Those police were acting in a manner that you would think they pulled over 2-3 black men wearing gang attire with a shooting reported a mile or two away 30 minutes ago.ccguns

Click to expand...

The whole thing, from start to end was cops being assholes to a black man. To top it off the fat angry cop said they would "let (the lieutenant) go" if he agreed to not press charges against them. "I'm going to be fine either way, so it's up to you if we continue to beat on you".

goddamn. Antifa have it right. Oppose fascist cops and don't let up.

mooray said:

I don't know why I unhide your comments sometimes. There hasn't been a single circumstance where I've thought, "you know, maybe he's okay and we just had a little misunderstanding". Nope, it's the same shit.

Fear aggression is a condition. This condition has no connection to whether or not the fear is valid, though usually it is not.....which is why it's a fucking condition and not just considered normal behavior. You've manufactured a non-sequitur connection because you're a hypersensitive dildo looking to create conflict.

Mooray: I usually like dogs better than cats.

FogTard: WHY U MURDER CATS U PIECE OF SHIT?!?!!

Click to expand...

Just keep me on ignore. Your weak assed cop smooching "both sides are at fault" white entitlement can't handle criticism. But you are completely wrong about "blame society". Nope. It's cops who are beating and killing the people they are supposed to protect. They do so for no good reason. Weak white men like you give them a pass and they continue on with the beatings while laughing at your weak shit.

It's time to stop that shit. I've been out there protesting with others. I've seen how cops gave deference to Proud Boys and been reporting that here for four years. I've seen cops walk with Proud Boys and beat Antifa, arrest Antifa while escorting Proud Boys who started the brawl across a bridge with a protective cordon around them. Last year, much of the rest of the country finally saw what I've been seeing too. In response, the police participated alongside Proud Boys in the sacking of the US Capitol Building. It's not a matter of "coming to an understanding" with these guys. We understand alright. We understand that they WON'T reform themselves. We understand that they are increasing the aggression and intimidation of civilians. So we need to change our justice system and end their aggressive bullshit.

Ahhhhh, you hear that? Me either! Feels good to be diarrhea free not having to listen to someone add in their own lying bs just so they can get their outrage boner.

Fogdawg, I understand why the fog is there. your clear thinking is blocked because your head is up your ass. The money is in the 24/7 tv coverage. I never said it was driving it.. Double jeopardy only applies after a verdict is reached. A hung jury can be sent back twice and then a mistrial can be declared. Then there are other options. If a mistrial occurs due to a hung jury, the prosecutor may decide to retry the case. A judge may decide to disallow this in some cases, but the prosecutor is usually allowed to proceed. The defendant could agree to the lesser charge, if the prosecution would agree... Go suck it doggie..

mytwhyt said:

Fogdawg, I understand why the fog is there. your clear thinking is blocked because your head is up your ass. The money is in the 24/7 tv coverage. I never said it was driving it.. Double jeopardy only applies after a verdict is reached. A hung jury can be sent back twice and then a mistrial can be declared. Then there are other options. If a mistrial occurs due to a hung jury, the prosecutor may decide to retry the case. A judge may decide to disallow this in some cases, but the prosecutor is usually allowed to proceed. The defendant could agree to the lesser charge, if the prosecution would agree... Go suck it doggie..

Click to expand...

Hey mighty white, I'm so glad that you were offended by my post. It was meant to be so. I wanted to offend you because you were dismissing the Chauvin trial as something done for TV and not because a cop murdered a man in front of a crowd. You are either deliberately trying to deflect or perhaps you sincerely don't understand what is wrong with Chauvin murdering a Black man in front of a crowd. Either way, its a bad look on you, just saying.

I'm not a lawyer and if you aren't then maybe you should read before you blather away with your racist bs.

This from a site written by lawyers:

Since the 1824 case of United States v. Perez, Supreme Court precedent has held that retrial in the event of a mistrial is permissible. However, this ruling was not made on Constitutional grounds.

According to law professor Janet Findlater,

Although the question in Perez was indeed whether a defendant could be retried following a hung jury, nowhere in the unanimous opinion authored by Justice Story, is either double jeopardy or the fifth amendment mentioned. This failure to refer to the Constitution was not inadvertent. In 1824, the hung jury question did not implicate the double jeopardy clause of the fifth amendment. At that time, the Court adhered to the English common law view that jeopardy does not attach until a verdict is rendered.

Click to expand...

But that is no longer the Court’s view. Findlater continues:

Since Perez, however, the Supreme Court has held that jeopardy attaches before a verdict is rendered—specifically when the jury is impaneled and sworn. In doing so, it created an issue that did not obtain when Perez was decided: the effect of the double jeopardy clause on the retrial of cases that abort before verdict. The Court, however, has repeatedly read Perez as if it had established the standard for resolving the extent of the defendant’s double jeopardy protection following a mistrial. Although recently acknowledging the likely inaccuracy of that view, the Court treated the matter as one “of academic interest only.” In so doing, it simply compounded error.

Click to expand...

Reference: Janet E. Findlater, Retrial after a Hung Jury: The Double Jeopardy Problem, 129 U. Pa. L. Rev. 701 (1981).

So, yes, Chauvin might face a retrial if there is a hung jury and he might not. If there is a guilty verdict after a second trial there could be grounds for dismissal on appeal due to double jeopardy. If he is not convicted, the decision whether or not to go back for another trial will be up to the prosecutor and the judge. The issue of double jeopardy will be part of the discussion.

The decision won't be, as you say, up to TV. That's just cynical talk.

the good news is, Chauvin will be able to appeal based upon shitty lawyering. the union can hire anyone..does this mean no one in their right mind would take this case? his witnesses are doing more harm than good.

Shawanda Hill on Floyd: 'he was tired because he had been working'..

objection to your own witness; stricken from the record; heard by the jury

I missed that. Do you know why it wouldn't be allowed? Was it an additional comment that didn't pertain to the question?

mooray said:

I missed that. Do you know why it wouldn't be allowed? Was it an additional comment that didn't pertain to the question?

Click to expand...

defense wants to link Floyds 'nodding off' to drug use and only want yes and no answers. the answer that 'he was tired because he was working' was opinion even though it could and probably was true.

I don't like this guy much. You can see the difference in perception when they comment on why an ambulance is needed, cop says Floyd may have hurt himself, but she knew otherwise, even though she couldn't see anything.

resting comfortably.

A cop goes to jail, his cell mates say you need to choose if you're going to be mummy or daddy, the cop says I'll be daddy, cell mate says well come over and give mummy a blow job

Chauvin is going to have a malpractice suit against Nelson and the Police Union.

Nelson isn't stupid but there are many times he could have objected yesterday and never did..hmmmmm.

What do we think about his decision not to testify?

Seems like he realizes that if it's not a hung jury, the manslaughter charge is as good as it gets and there's no way to describe his perspective without sounding like a killer.

mooray said:

What do we think about his decision not to testify?

Seems like he realizes that if it's not a hung jury, the manslaughter charge is as good as it gets and there's no way to describe his perspective without sounding like a killer.

Click to expand...

smart. he'll cave on the cross- he'll have no answer for why he didn't get off of george's neck when the other cop said he didn't have a pulse.

as soon as i heard the word 'test' from blackwell..i'm thinking THE JUDGE JUST SAID NOT TO MENTION 'TEST'!!!! W>>>T>>>F????? you're a prosecutor..i got the same instructions as you but i'm home and you're the attorney! i understood them..i understood them

nelson was chomping at the bit for mistrial.

PS blackwell just used his gun hand instead of his taser hand- you just witnessed it.

training does not displace heat of the moment..we are human beings.

schuylaar said:

as soon as i heard the word 'test' from blackwell..i'm thinking THE JUDGE JUST SAID NOT TO MENTION 'TEST'!!!! W>>>T>>>F????? you're a prosecutor..i got the same instructions as you but i'm home and you're the attorney! i understood them..i understood them

nelson was chomping at the bit for mistrial.

Click to expand...

I believe he was referencing another test that was previously admitted as evidence.

It’s interesting they can’t bring up the CO levels in George Floyd’s blood to combat the defence claim. I would have thought that anything from the autopsy could be admitted at anytime.