Derek Chauvin on trial for killing of George Floyd Trial live stream...

Is Derek Chauvin - Guilty or Innocent?


  • Total voters
    214
Herself sent me this link earlier this morning. If you have time I recommend watching the whole podcast.

 
Herself sent me this link earlier this morning. If you have time I recommend watching the whole podcast.

I expected the others three heads to fall off with all the nodding
 
They were beating those protestors at Burntollet Bridge because they were breaking the law, those protestors brought it on themselves!
I know of one policeman who was at Burntollet and had quite a hectic time keeping the two sides seperate. He got a facefull of pepper from one of the Civil Right protestors (who he had been effectively protecting apparently) for his troubles.
 

Cutaway

LE
Kit Reviewer
I wish our police would choke out more violent criminals . The fat little pcsos are usually petty and ineffective.



 
Floyd was a martyr because of his skin color, not because he was a decent person who was randomly picked by LE to kill.
Nobody (at least, nobody with an ounce of sense) is claiming that Chauvin went into that situation with lethal intent. Otherwise he'd have been charged with murder in the first degree.

Kneeling on someone's neck/back for extended periods is risky, and may result in positional asphyxia. So what if nine times out of ten / ninety-nine times out of a hundred, you get away with it; you might be leaning an inch further up or down the neck, you might have your weight positioned differently over your knee, they might be lying at a different angle, you might take your weight off them before you actually kill them.

This time, for whatever reason, Chauvin didn't "get away with it", someone died. Maybe he'd done it lots of times before, maybe this was one of a handful of occasions; it doesn't matter. And because he had knelt on Floyd for nine minutes, ignoring his pleas, when Floyd hadn't done much more than been an awkward twat, the jury concluded that Chauvin's actions were sufficiently negligent to warrant a conviction of murder in the second degree - Chauvin killed Floyd through a combination of his potentially-lethal (and arguably unnecessary) behaviour, and his negligence in failing to monitor the health of his prisoner. Nine minutes of ignoring Floyd's pleas that he couldn't breathe, never once bothering to remove his weight and reassess the situation.

What the court concluded is that he handled the situation with a reckless and negligent attitude to his use of force, and that someone died as a result.
Put simply, Chauvin obviously didn't care about Floyd's life.
 
Last edited:
Chauvin was railroaded because a career criminal managed to break the law again
You might want to check out the tax evasion charges against Chauvin. Consistently lying/cheating on your tax return may be a "white collar crime", but it's still the act of a criminal; and doing it knowingly for over half a decade as a planned part of your income stream would also put Chauvin into "career criminal" territory...

...unless you're claiming that Chauvin is being railroaded for that too; and that the estimated $20,000 in taxes that he failed to pay over five years is fake news? In which case, we can just wait until June and his trial for tax evasion.
 
Last edited:

Cutaway

LE
Kit Reviewer
From Derek Chauvin to the RUC/PIRA...only on ARRSE.

@Gravelbelly serious question mate, are you by any chance female?
 
Nobody (at least, nobody with an ounce of sense) is claiming that Chauvin went into that situation with lethal intent. Otherwise he'd have been charged with murder in the first degree.

Kneeling on someone's neck/back for extended periods is risky, and may result in positional asphyxia. So what if nine times out of ten / ninety-nine times out of a hundred, you get away with it; you might be leaning an inch further up or down the neck, you might have your weight positioned differently over your knee, they might be lying at a different angle, you might take your weight off them before you actually kill them.

This time, for whatever reason, Chauvin didn't "get away with it", someone died. Maybe he'd done it lots of times before, maybe this was one of a handful of occasions; it doesn't matter. And because he had knelt on Floyd for nine minutes, ignoring his pleas, when Floyd hadn't done much more than been an awkward twat, the jury concluded that Chauvin's actions were sufficiently negligent to warrant a conviction of murder in the second degree - Chauvin killed Floyd through a combination of his potentially-lethal (and arguably unnecessary) behaviour, and his negligence in failing to monitor the health of his prisoner. Nine minutes of ignoring Floyd's pleas that he couldn't breathe, never once bothering to remove his weight and reassess the situation.

What the court concluded is that he handled the situation with a reckless and negligent attitude to his use of force, and that someone died as a result.
Put simply, Chauvin obviously didn't care about Floyd's life.
And it starts again, same old
 
From Derek Chauvin to the RUC/PIRA...only on ARRSE.

@Gravelbelly serious question mate, are you by any chance female?
Nope, just a bloke trying to use the 1960s/70s RUC / Stormont as analogy... not a perfect analogy by any means, but one that older ARRSErs should be familiar with.
  1. There were well-deserving, decidedly bad b**tards who ended up in Milltown Cemetery after someone worked through the Yellow Card in good faith.
  2. There were very rare incidents where some decidedly bad b**tard got shot by soldiers who were acting outside the Yellow Card rules; no tears shed.
  3. There were undeserving civvies who got shot by soldiers that weren't exercising the judicious use of force (see: Bloody Sunday).
  4. There were tragic situations where someone made their best efforts at the RoE, just a tragic case of wrong place/wrong time for some undeserving civvy (two brothers driving through Loughgall at the time of the ambush, wearing boiler suits because they'd been at work)
It's possible for all of these statements to be true, but there are always those who will insist on only either 1. or 3, and for the rest: a) all martyred by eeeevil Brit murder squads or b) they was a terrorist nail bomber, their gun was smuggled away / they deserved it anyway. The question is whether this analogy holds
  1. Floyd was a career criminal who deserved it, Chauvin was acting correctly and innocent
  2. Floyd was a career criminal, but Chauvin behaved recklessly in his use of force and is guilty
  3. Floyd was an innocent martyr, Chauvin behaved recklessly in his use of force and is guilty
  4. Floyd was a tragic mistake, Chauvin was acting correctly and was just unlucky.
  5. Floyd would have died anyway, it's just a complete coincidence that Chauvin was kneeling on his neck for several minutes before and after it happened
Some people in this thread seem to be arguing for option 1 or 4; on the basis of 5, or that 3 obviously isn't true, while ignoring 2 (or vice versa). The jury decided that Chauvin behaved recklessly, and unintentionally killed someone as a result (either 2 or 3, but the important thing is the negligent use of force).

(Edited to add option 5...)
 
Last edited:

Gout Man

LE
Book Reviewer
From Derek Chauvin to the RUC/PIRA...only on ARRSE.

@Gravelbelly serious question mate, are you by any chance female?
Did he originate from Boston:???:
That might go some way to explain it, I mean we’ve already had a Gingsters Cornish Pasty on this thread.
Anything is possible on Arrse.
 
…Another thing that should be done is the abolishment of military vehicles and weapons. And bring back community policing including walking the beat to be gunned down in sniper attacks, drive by shootings or lynched by a rentamob…
Snip. My bold. Some of you may be familiar with the concepts.
 

Cutaway

LE
Kit Reviewer
I do not agree with defunding law enforcement but the rules and training need to be changed. Another thing that should be done is the abolishment of military vehicles and weapons. And bring back community policing including walking the beat.
Who's your dealer ?
He's supplying you with top grade uncut shit.

Much like that post.
 
Who's your dealer ?
He's supplying you with top grade uncut shit.

Much like that post.

It makes for a nice fluffy world with rainbows and unicorns and teaching the world to sing.
 

Gout Man

LE
Book Reviewer
Police training in America
Not sure they will go down the Finnish route. “Sarge, some fecker has just shot me , can I return fire:???:
 
Police training in America
Not sure they will go down the Finnish route. “Sarge, some fecker has just shot me , can I return fire:???:

I thought what the article said about Finland couldn't be true. It isn't. Police in Finland shoot their firearms in the line of duty about ten times each year
 

endure

GCM
I thought what the article said about Finland couldn't be true. It isn't. Police in Finland shoot their firearms in the line of duty about ten times each year
The article was written in 2018 so that's 7 people shot and killed by Finnish police in 18 years.

"Statistics from the Finnish Police reveal that officers shoot their firearms in the line of duty very rarely. Police killed a man after a high-speed chase and shoot-out in Lempäälä on Saturday, bringing the infrequency of such firearm use by the Finnish authorities into the limelight once again.

Saturday's death brought the number of people killed by a police bullet in Finland since 2000 up to seven."
 
Top