George Floyd trial,could you make a case for the defendant not being guilty of the charges?

Maybe your computer is saving it as a .jpg instead of a gif?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Nah, it’s saving as a gif. Oh well! Thx for trying

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Why be such a bitch?

 

Stuff up

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

A fine prejudgment! There's a term for that I believe.

If you say so. Seems pretty brainless to me, but if it appeals to you . . .

 

Was his windpipe collapsed? No. Did Chauvin cut off his blood supply to his brain? No.

What happens when a carotid artery is 100 percent blocked? It’s bad, but it’s not the end of the world. You’ve still have two other arteries, an internal and external carotid artery supplying blood flow to your brain.

The medical expert for the prosecution had to combine the weight on his back to describe compression and positional asphyxia. He said that the handcuffs are extremely important. It’s how officer Chauvin and officer King manipulate the handcuffs by pushing them into his back and pushing them high.



What Does It Really Take to Kill Someone With Compression Asphyxia?

It takes roughly 570lbs. It would take two 285-pound cops standing and balancing on the back or chest of a suspect to produce compression asphyxia.

This is what’s disturbing. In the beginning of ↱this video, it shows what’s occurring when he first said that he couldn’t breathe. You have to decide whether or not he’s lying at this point or is really experiencing some difficulty. Is he telling the truth? Is he having trouble breathing here at this point? The officers didn’t think so. They continued to assume he was lying even when they put him on the ground. If you think that he was having trouble breathing at this point, what was the cause?

Sadly, there are no anatomical findings of wooden chest during an autopsy because chest wall rigidity is lost after death. If it was opioid-induced chest wall rigidity, turning him on his side wouldn’t have saved him. CPR wouldn’t have saved him.

Yes, I think so.

He was sacrificed because the needs of the many outweighed the needs of the few.

As a juror, if you thought he wasn’t guilty, could you do the right thing?

Probably not because it would be too dangerous for you, your family, and your community.

 

Would you have felt this way if the jury had been sequestered for the entire trial?

 

Right. No one claimed that.

Actually carotid and vertebral arteries, but yes.

Given that he did actually stop breathing while Chauvin's knee was on his back, you claiming "they thought he was lying about not being able to breathe" is not credible.

The pressure on his back and neck.

Again, that's your opinion, based on what some guy on the Internet told you to believe. I am going to go with the two medical professionals who examined him. Sorry.

He was found guilty because he killed a man.

Yes, and have done so. I've been on six juries so far.

 

You're not following. Let's try this again.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/29/us/george-floyd-new-video-officers-kneel-trnd/index.html

In the beginning of this video linked above, it shows what’s occurring when he first said that he couldn’t breathe. You have to decide whether or not he’s lying at this point or is really experiencing some difficulty. Is he telling the truth? Is he having trouble breathing here at this point? The officers didn’t think so. They continued to assume he was lying even when they put him on the ground. If you think that he was having trouble breathing, while still in the car, what was the cause?

 

They weren't anonymous. So, yes. They all knew about the riots, which happened before the trial. So, yes.

 

Correct. You could reasonably ask that question at that point.

Approximately six minutes later, Floyd stopped breathing. You can, at that point, no longer reasonably question whether or not the victim was telling the truth. Nor can you reasonably claim that there was no concern about the victim's breathing, since the victim had expressed exactly that concern. Yet Chauvin kept his knee on Floyd's back for at least another two minutes.

If, when the victim had stopped breathing, Chauvin had released him, turned him over and begun CPR, then this would never have made it to trial. Chauvin could then reasonably argue that he thought Floyd was faking it, and as soon as he realized he wasn't, he stopped his efforts to restrain him and tried to save his life.

But he did not do that - and his refusal to do so was a big factor in the eventual determination of guilt.

 

That's not what I asked. Why was he having trouble breathing when he was in the car?

 

Probably because he had heart disease, had recently recovered from COVID-19 and was handcuffed, all of which make it more difficult to breathe. He also had claustrophobia, which makes it feel like the victim is unable to breathe when in a small space (or when being threatened with being put in a small space.)

Once he was on the ground, of course, the knee in the back was what made it difficult to breathe.

 

The crime occurred when a handcuffed suspect was pulled from the vehicle.
The person pulling him from the vehicle is responsible for anything that happens after.

 

He never said that he had claustrophobia when he was put in the back of a squad car in 2019. So, he couldn't breathe because he had heart disease and recently recovered from COVID-19. Is that correct?

 

That's not true.

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-new...e-was-struggling-breathe-officer-put-n1218556

Floyd complained of not being able to breathe while the police tried forcing him into the police car. He mentioned claustrophobia, and was compliant once handcuffed. No need to manufacture a timeline of events before or after that point. Police officers come upon suspects in the health condition they’re in - if Chauvin chose to disbelieve Floyd, that’s on him. The verdict wasn’t based on Chauvin being the only factor in Floyd’s death; he was a substantial causal factor.

 

Rapid polling right after the verdict indicate Americans overwhelmingly support the verdict. 71% of Americans - even 55% of republicans - agreed with the outcome of the trial and support the result. A rare moment of bipartisan unity, which is cool.

 

I hope it lasts.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!