Derek Chauvin Trial

[Chef Jim]

9 minutes ago, Motorin' said:

 

I heard Newt Gingrich of all people explain that premeditation does not have to be done days or even hours before hand. But the premeditated aspect could be conducted in the process, if there's enough time to recognize that the action will lead to death, and a choice is then made to continue with the action. 

 

So when Chauvin learns that Floyd has no pulse, his choice to continue kneeling on the neck is made knowing that it could very well end in his death. 

 

You could also make the case for Murder 2 or 3. And the difference really comes down to Chauvin's state of mind. 

 

His actions could very well be indicative of Murder 3, that he was mentally depraved... He allegedly threatened the off duty fire fighter who offered to provide CPR. I need to hear what he actually said and how he said it to see if he sounded out of his mind. 

See above 

 

What is Newt Gingrich's background with criminal law?  Specifically with regard to levels of homicide?  I seriously don't know.  Every place I looked it is planned out in advance.  

[Motorin']

3 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

 

What is Newt Gingrich's background with criminal law?  Specifically with regard to levels of homicide?  I seriously don't know.  Every place I looked it is planned out in advance.  

 

Not sure about Newt's criminal law history...

 

Yes, planned in advanced is always premeditated. But premeditation strictly only requires "that the defendant think out the act, no matter how quickly, it can be as simple deciding to pick up a hammer that is lying nearby and to use it as a weapon."

 

Now in the case of a person picking up a hammer and striking someone, was it in the heat of the moment? Or were they calm, cool and collected? They either reacted out of passion or thought it through. 

 

If Chauvin knows he has no pulse, is not in a depraved state of mind, and thinks through to the conclusion of not providing CPR and removing his knee, then the 2.5 minutes he continues to kneel after learning there is no pulse could be considered premeditated. 

 

 

 

 

[Chef Jim]

5 minutes ago, Motorin' said:

 

Not sure about Newt's criminal law history...

 

Yes, planned in advanced is always premeditated. But premeditation strictly only requires "that the defendant think out the act, no matter how quickly, it can be as simple deciding to pick up a hammer that is lying nearby and to use it as a weapon."

 

Now in the case of a person picking up a hammer and striking someone, was it in the heat of the moment? Or were they calm, cool and collected? They either reacted out of passion or thought it through. 

 

If Chauvin knows he has no pulse, is not in a depraved state of mind, and thinks through to the conclusion of not providing CPR and removing his knee, then the 2.5 minutes he continues to kneel after learning there is no pulse could be considered premeditated. 

 

 

 

 

 

There seems to be some confusion. Either in the information you quoted or my understanding.  If there is no time associated with "no matter how quickly" taking that as written couldn't any prosecutor go for premeditated?  But then again the defense can just say "prove the amount of time that lapsed from when the defendant's mind said kill and the act was actually carried out."  Impossible to prove in my mind (no pun intended)   

[B-Man]

 

FTA:

 

* The state preemptively showed the officers’ body cam videos that revealed, not just the last minutes while Floyd was being restrained on the street, but the 20 minutes or so that preceded. This was certainly a revelation to most or all of the jurors. Based on their answers during jury selection, they had all seen the famous last nine minutes that were posted on social media by a bystander, but had no idea of how George Floyd, big and strong and out of his mind on drugs, had battled police officers to a standoff, culminating in their acceding to his demand that he lie on the street rather than sit in the back of their squad car while waiting for an ambulance. Jurors also were probably surprised to learn that Floyd had been foaming at the mouth and complaining of not being able to breathe from the moment when officers came on the scene.

 

* George Floyd’s girlfriend was a key witness. The state tried to present her as a let’s-go-for-a-walk-in-the-park flower child, but it soon became evident on cross-examination that she and Floyd were drug addicts. This was the first time the jury learned that Floyd’s death may have been caused by a fentanyl overdose, not by police officers kneeling on him. In fact, Floyd overdosed on fentanyl in March, just two months before his death, and spent five days in the hospital. Perhaps he took just a little bit more, a fatal overdose, in May.

 

* So the state has effectively reduced its claims against Chauvin from nine minutes to four. I am willing to believe that it would have been better practice for Chauvin and the others to get off Floyd at some point, but seriously: failure to get off a guy who is crazed with drugs and has been battling with officers for 15 minutes, and more or less winning, is murder? or manslaughter? I don’t think that is an easy sell.

 

* Yesterday, a senior official of Minnesota’s Bureau of Criminal Apprehension testified. Nelson’s cross-examination was effective. He brought out the fact that the normal procedure is for the BCA to investigate a crime or alleged crime, and write a report. That report is delivered to the relevant authorities, who then decide whether to bring criminal charges against one or more defendants. But that normal procedure wasn’t followed here. Rather, criminal charges were brought almost immediately against Chauvin and the other officers, while the investigation was just beginning. Charge first, investigate later–that is how things proceeded, under political pressure. Watch for this to be a significant theme in Nelson’s closing argument.

 

\

* Moreover, embarrassing testimony emerged yesterday. Two vehicles, the SUV in which Floyd, his drug dealer and a woman friend were seated, and the MPD squad car, were impounded and processed by the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension. But white pills in those vehicles were left unchecked. Why? Because the BCA didn’t realize that drugs were a factor in the case. It was only in January, as a result of a request by defense counsel, that the BCA finally identified and tested pills in one of the vehicles that turned out to contain fentanyl–a lethal dose of which was in Floyd’s blood when he died.

 

 

The prosecution will conclude its case with expert witnesses on cause of death, the key issue in the case. Did Minneapolis police officers kill George Floyd by kneeling on him, as the local and national press have relentlessly asserted for nearly a year? Or did Floyd die of a drug overdose, with the officers essentially bystanders? The medical evidence on both sides will be critical. We know that when he died, Floyd had something like three times a lethal dose of fentanyl in his system. How will the prosecution try to overcome that fact?

 

Again, the jury is likely to be surprised. Far from claiming that the officers’ kneeling on Floyd–entirely proper, at least for the first five minutes or so–killed him outright, I expect the prosecution will argue that the officers’ restraint was a contributing factor in the larger context of Floyd’s drug overdose and other health issues. Minnesota law says that a defendant can be guilty of manslaughter or murder if his wrongful conduct was a “substantial causal factor” in the decedent’s death.

 

When this trial began, I doubt that any juror expected the prosecution to argue that whatever Derek Chauvin did was not the sole cause, or the primary cause, of George Floyd’s death, but rather a “substantial causal factor” along with a fentanyl overdose and other serious health issues. Will the jury be willing to destroy Derek Chauvin’s life and send him to prison on this theory?

 

That raises, once again, the question of whether Derek Chauvin can possibly get a fair trial. Everyone knows that if the jury doesn’t convict, and probably if it doesn’t convict Chauvin of murder, the city of Minneapolis will go up in flames. This is why the power of the state is arrayed so unanimously against him. Chauvin may have misjudged, may have screwed up, for four minutes on May 25, 2020. But he is being sacrificed to raisons d’État.

 

By the way, Floyd’s drug dealer did testify yesterday. The dealer was with Floyd on May 25 and pled the 5th on the ground that he may be prosecuted for supplying Floyd with the overdose of fentanyl that killed him. But the jury won’t see that.

 

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2021/04/the-chauvin-trial-so-far.php

[Unforgiven]

    One of the most infuriating facts in this whole case is how much the last nine minutes were shown over and

over and over again...conveniently hiding the first 10-20 mins...it is a symbol of how blatantly dishonest the left

and their media propaganda wing is.

   A stunning example of large scale gaslighting.

Edited April 8, 2021 by Unforgiven

[Motorin']

1 hour ago, Chef Jim said:

 

There seems to be some confusion. Either in the information you quoted or my understanding.  If there is no time associated with "no matter how quickly" taking that as written couldn't any prosecutor go for premeditated?  But then again the defense can just say "prove the amount of time that lapsed from when the defendant's mind said kill and the act was actually carried out."  Impossible to prove in my mind (no pun intended)   

 

In the case of a person who gets enraged, in a crime of passion, the point is that they weren't able to think it through because of the rage ect.

 

I think the main point of premeditation is thinking the action through. Chauvin had 6.5 minutes to think through his actions before Floyd had no pulse. Then continued after his heart stopped beating.  

 

I think this would be a good example: A draw bridge operator goes about his business of raising and lowering a draw bridge. They make an announcement that the bridge is closing  some kids climb into a restricted area. If the draw bridge operator is never alerted to the fact that kids crossed the line, and they are killed when the bridge closes, there's probably no crime unless there was some negligence. Perhaps not checking a warning light he was supposed to check would make it manslaughter if the light would have alerted him to the presence of people in the area where the lowering bridge would kill them. 

 

Now if the operator knows that kids just crossed the line flips out and slams the bridge closed in a fit of rage, it would probably fit Minnesota's Manslaughter 1 or Murder 3 bc he acted in a depraved state of mind... crime of passion, rage... 

 

Here's where it could fit Murder 1. If the warning light goes off, alerting him to the presence of people in the danger zone, he notices it and continues to lower the bridge. A minute or two later when the bridge is approaching the moment of no return, his coworkers radio in to stop the bridge immediately or it will kill people, he has the time in a sane mind to think through what will happen. If he choses to not stop the bridge, has he "premeditated," in terms of thought through his actions? I think the minimal definition of "thinking through the consequences" applies in premeditation, and he could be convicted of Murder 1. 

 

I think this applies in Chauvin's case when 1. Floyd becomes non-responsive and the pressure is continued, then 2. the other officer finds no pulse and Chauvin continues to apply pressure to the neck and refuses CPR. 

 

If Chauvin had removed his knee when Floyd became non-responsive and Floyd went on to die due to lack of oxygen, that could be the lower manslaughter 2 because he was clearly subdued, handcuffed behind his back and the knee to the neck “creates an unreasonable risk, and consciously takes chances of causing death or great bodily harm to another.”

 

The fact that he continued after it appears Floyd loses consciousness and then has no pulse means Chauvin is a sick sick person and is guilty of at least Murder 2. But you have to ask, what did he think was going to happen when he continues to knee on the man's neck for 2.5 minutes after he has no pulse?  It really does not appear that he has any sense of the inherent value of the life of Georg Floyd. 

 

 

 

[Tiberius]

1 hour ago, Unforgiven said:

    One of the most infuriating facts in this whole case is how much the last nine minutes were shown over and

over and over again...conveniently hiding the first 10-20 mins...it is a symbol of how blatantly dishonest the left

and their media propaganda wing is.

   A stunning example of large scale gaslighting.

You mean the nine minutes in which the cop murdered an American citizen? 

[Tiberius]

This doctors testimony was devastating. He basically showed how Floyd was murdered from a medical perspective. Pretty damning, yet again 

[SoCal Deek]

10 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

You mean the nine minutes in which the cop murdered an American citizen? 

Odd choice of words Tibs. Would it be somehow different if the victim was a French tourist? 

[T&C]

I might be wrong but murder 1 isn't on the table at all.

[Unforgiven]

The prosecution in the trial of former Minneapolis Police Department (MPD) officer Derek Chauvin for the murder of George Floyd has begun referring to the victim’s “neck area” rather than his “neck” after the defense pointed out that Chauvin’s knee was not on his neck throughout the entire encounter, as the media previously reported.

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

3 hours ago, Motorin' said:

 

I heard Newt Gingrich of all people explain that premeditation does not have to be done days or even hours before hand. But the premeditated aspect could be conducted in the process, if there's enough time to recognize that the action will lead to death, and a choice is then made to continue with the action. 

 

So when Chauvin learns that Floyd has no pulse, his choice to continue kneeling on the neck is made knowing that it could very well end in his death. 

 

You could also make the case for Murder 2 or 3. And the difference really comes down to Chauvin's state of mind. 

 

His actions could very well be indicative of Murder 3, that he was mentally depraved... He allegedly threatened the off duty fire fighter who offered to provide CPR. I need to hear what he actually said and how he said it to see if he sounded out of his mind. 

See above 

Interesting... makes sense though. 

 

By that argument even prolonging allowing emt’s to intervene might fall into premeditation. 

 

I just hope whatever he is sentenced to is enough to keep the rioters home. 

 

 

[Tiberius]

51 minutes ago, Unforgiven said:

The prosecution in the trial of former Minneapolis Police Department (MPD) officer Derek Chauvin for the murder of George Floyd has begun referring to the victim’s “neck area” rather than his “neck” after the defense pointed out that Chauvin’s knee was not on his neck throughout the entire encounter, as the media previously reported.

You think it’s ok for cops to hold people down like that? You think Chauvin did a good job? 

[Doc]

2 hours ago, Unforgiven said:

    One of the most infuriating facts in this whole case is how much the last nine minutes were shown over and

over and over again...conveniently hiding the first 10-20 mins...it is a symbol of how blatantly dishonest the left

and their media propaganda wing is.

   A stunning example of large scale gaslighting.

There is this misguided belief that if someone dies, he/she can/should not be held accountable for their actions leading up to his/her death.  It's odd.

[Motorin']

44 minutes ago, Doc said:

There is this misguided belief that if someone dies, he/she can/should not be held accountable for their actions leading up to his/her death.  It's odd.

 

How long can you live without breathing? The right to breath has nothing to do with being held accountable for past actions. 

[Doc]

14 minutes ago, Motorin' said:

How long can you live without breathing? The right to breath has nothing to do with being held accountable for past actions. 

 

I never said they did.

[Motorin']

5 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

I never said they did.

 

People actually can't be accountable for their actions after they're dead. Because they're dead. 

 

What George Floyd did leading up to his death doesn't in anyway, shape or form justify what Chauvin did to him. And Chauvin will be held accountable for his actions. 

 

 

[Doc]

4 minutes ago, Motorin' said:

People actually can't be accountable for their actions after they're dead. Because they're dead. 

 

What George Floyd did leading up to his death doesn't in anyway, shape or form justify what Chauvin did to him. And Chauvin will be held accountable for his actions.

 

It didn't justify Chauvin continuing to kneel on Floyd after going unresponsive and especially pulseless and I've repeatedly said that Chauvin should be charged with Murder 2.  But Floyd bears responsibility for his actions that led to getting to that point.  If you disagree, we'll agree to disagree and leave it at that.

[Motorin']

3 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

It didn't justify Chauvin continuing to kneel on Floyd after going unresponsive and especially pulseless and I've repeatedly said that Chauvin should be charged with Murder 2.  But Floyd bears responsibility for his actions that led to getting to that point.  If you disagree, we'll agree to disagree and leave it at that.

 

That's fine. I think we're talking past each other. Perhaps you mean he should be blamed, as there is no way for a dead person to take responsibility or be held accountable after they are dead. 

[Doc]

6 minutes ago, Motorin' said:

That's fine. I think we're talking past each other. Perhaps you mean he should be blamed, as there is no way for a dead person to take responsibility or be held accountable after they are dead. 

 

Yeah, it's semantics.  Obviously nothing can be done to him now that he's dead.