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

Is Derek Chauvin - Guilty or Innocent?


  • Total voters
    213
What does that mean? That's the prosecution's job.

No, it’s isn’t - the caselaw appears to say that the role of the prosecutor in summing up a trial is not to seek conviction but to seek justice, and it appears the caselaw says that therefore the prosecution cannot essentially call the defence untrue or a fabrication, however dubious it might be.
 

Gout Man

LE
Book Reviewer
Its been a really interesting case and the prosecution has embarked on a marathon rebuttal of the defences closing statement to the extent the prosecution has two closing statements which seems totally inappropriate, but nothing about the case appears to be entirely normal.
I was very impressed with Mr Nelson in his summing up argument and he certainly put up a good fight. It’s a strange system that allows the prosecution to have a second go and argue what the defence had just said.
The judges summing up was quite different to anything I’ve heard in our Crown Courts and as you say it was very interesting.
Mr Nelson stated that he wasn’t pleased with the prosecution and stated that a miss trial might be called so he will definitely be putting in an appeal against any conviction.
All in all with my jury head on I’m going to stick my neck out and say,
Count one. Not Guilty
Count two. Not Guilty
Count three. Not Guilty.

There I’ve said it, that’s the joy of these discussions you can change your mind as the case unfolds, exactly what the judge said to the jury.
My reasons are that there were compelling arguments regarding the exact cause of death and why he died as well as the use of force bearing in mind the lack of bruising on and below the skin of the neck which makes me think that there wasn’t that much weight being transferred to the neck and that with the adrenaline and Floyds health problems he was a ticking time bomb which went off at just the wrong time.

Of course the defendant will probably be found guilty on all counts but if that’s the case I’ll just deny all knowledge of this post.
 
Last edited:
I was very impressed with Mr Nelson in his summing up argument and he certainly put up a good fight. It’s a strange system that allows the prosecution to have a second go and argue what the defence had just said.
The judges summing up was quite different to anything I’ve heard in our Crown Courts and as you say it was very interesting.
Mr Nelson stated that he wasn’t pleased with the prosecution and stated that a miss trial might be called so he will definitely be putting in an appeal against any conviction.
All in all with my jury head on I’m going to stick my neck out and say,
Count one. Not Guilty
Count two. Not Guilty
Count three. Not Guilty.

There I’ve said it, that’s the joy of these discussions you can change your mind as the case unfolds, exactly what the judge said to the jury.
My reasons, are that there were compelling arguments regarding the exact cause of death and why he died as well as the use of force bearing in mind the lack of bruising on and below the skin of the neck which manages me think that there wasn’t that much weight being transferred to the neck and that with the adrenaline and Floyds health problems he was a ticking time bomb which went off at just the wrong time.

Of course the defendant will probably be found guilty on all counts but if that’s the case I’ll just deny all knowledge of this post.

I think the only certainty is that shares in emergency glazing repairs companies are a solid buy right now
 
All in all with my jury head on I’m going to stick my neck out and say,
Count one. Not Guilty
Count two. Not Guilty
Count three. Not Guilty.
I've only been following what has been posted on here but, against all odds, I think you may be right. The judge's comments about not declaring a mistrial at this stage but allowing for an appeal suggests to me that he's hinting that Not Guilty is the likely outcome so why chuck that away when a retrial could come up with Guilty?

That said, the jurors may decide that self-preservation is worth more than justice and who would blame them, particularly if permission to appeal means that the burden of responsibility will fall on somebody else's shoulders?
 

endure

GCM
No, it’s isn’t - the caselaw appears to say that the role of the prosecutor in summing up a trial is not to seek conviction but to seek justice, and it appears the caselaw says that therefore the prosecution cannot essentially call the defence untrue or a fabrication, however dubious it might be.
So the role of the prosecution is what?
 
I thought the defence counsel put his case far better than the first prosecutor and done more than enough to put doubt in the jury's mind, taking an overview of the whole event rather than the narrow 9 minutes and thirty seconds window the prosecutor focused on in his final submission. It would not surprise me if a "Not guilty" verdict is forthcoming.
 

Flight

LE
Book Reviewer
90% constriction of his heart artery... Enough fentanyl to kill a horse... Methamphetamines, weed... High blood pressure.

Should never even have gone to court in my opinion.

Though if he is justly found not guilty then I'm going to really enjoy the wailing and nashing of teeth from the cult of woke.

Chauvin / Chauvinist is guilty of being male... Worse he is white. If any cult members doubt his guilt then we can guarantee they are too afraid of being ejected for heresy should they raise any doubts.

It's how cults work... Fear of being ejected from the community.
 
Congresswoman Maxine Waters is Threatening Violence if the officer isnt found guilty on all counts


 

RaiderBoat

Old-Salt
Waters should be arrested for fomenting riot, interfering with a legal procedure, Terrorist Threats, and be impeached.

She is doing the EXACT thing she accuses Trump et al of doing.
 
90% constriction of his heart artery... Enough fentanyl to kill a horse... Methamphetamines, weed... High blood pressure.

Should never even have gone to court in my opinion.

Though if he is justly found not guilty then I'm going to really enjoy the wailing and nashing of teeth from the cult of woke.

Chauvin / Chauvinist is guilty of being male... Worse he is white. If any cult members doubt his guilt then we can guarantee they are too afraid of being ejected for heresy should they raise any doubts.

It's how cults work... Fear of being ejected from the community.
Surely IF the underlying health conditions were the cause of death then Chauvin should be found not guilty however if his actions were the direct cause of death then he is guilty.

The jury must agree that Chauvin did commit an assault as he pinned Floyd to the ground, in order to open the path to a conviction on the most serious charge of second-degree murder, which requires the former officer to have committed a felony that led to death.
 
I was very impressed with Mr Nelson in his summing up argument and he certainly put up a good fight. It’s a strange system that allows the prosecution to have a second go and argue what the defence had just said.
The judges summing up was quite different to anything I’ve heard in our Crown Courts and as you say it was very interesting.
Mr Nelson stated that he wasn’t pleased with the prosecution and stated that a miss trial might be called so he will definitely be putting in an appeal against any conviction.
All in all with my jury head on I’m going to stick my neck out and say,
Count one. Not Guilty
Count two. Not Guilty
Count three. Not Guilty.

There I’ve said it, that’s the joy of these discussions you can change your mind as the case unfolds, exactly what the judge said to the jury.
My reasons, are that there were compelling arguments regarding the exact cause of death and why he died as well as the use of force bearing in mind the lack of bruising on and below the skin of the neck which makes me think that there wasn’t that much weight being transferred to the neck and that with the adrenaline and Floyds health problems he was a ticking time bomb which went off at just the wrong time.

Of course the defendant will probably be found guilty on all counts but if that’s the case I’ll just deny all knowledge of this post.
For myself:-
Count One and Two: Not Guilty.
Count Three: I was open minded, but I've felt the trial should have just been on this charge and I would have probably said guilty. What complicates is the heart attack and the absence of any tests on the squad vehicle for that leaking substance and perhaps some tests done on same make/model on whether carbon monoxide in levels high enough was the main cause... So yes, not guilty as chauvins life is anyways now in the toilet.
 

happyuk

War Hero
Isn't the neck hold or whatever it's called just standard operating procedure, used to prevent detainees from thrashing around and preventing incidents like this. Without wishing to sound misogynistic, are female officers really suited to restraining violent, huge upper body strength drug addled miscreants? Doesn't the male companion become become little more than a meat shield in situations like these?

 
Last edited:
1618905680005.png
 
I watched live Mr Nelson summing up his defence of Derek Chauvin yesterday evening. He was articulate and pitched his defence at a level that was easy to understand. I reckon not guilty but the system will need to find him guilty otherwise the country will implode with riots.
 

Themanwho

LE
Book Reviewer
Well it looks like there won't be any riots whatever the verdict.

In weighing how to respond to the verdict the US Justice department may send specially trained community facilitators to sort things out if President Biden orders it. :rolleyes:

"These specially trained community facilitators, a part of the Justice Department’s Community Relations Service, tout themselves as “America’s Peacemaker” by mediating disputes in communities and holding listening sessions to help prevent future conflicts."
Do the "Community Facilitators" hail from Texas perchance?

1618910315300.png
 
To add to others, I thought the prosecution relying on the 9.29 minutes (or whatever it was) made it so much easier for Nelson, and they (prosecution) backed themselves into a corner - who really, really made me think again. I was thinking "manslaughter" but now, the "multi-factorial approach to his death" may have shades of "if the glove don't fit you have to acquit". There is so much more reasonable doubt than I had picked up during the trial proper when it is all summarised. Especially when he goes through all the timings there is, for me at least, a ton of doubt now.
 
Top