Posts: 32,462
Threads: 3,127
Joined: Apr 2025
Reputation:
0
Prosecution: believe your eyes
(the attorney was really much better than that)
Defense: do not believe your eyes
- use the “reasonable cop” perspective and not eyewitnesses (seriously!)
And if that was not enough of an insult, there’s this:
“At the end of the case, when we’re done with these arguments, the court will instruct you on how to deal with these biases and the perception issues,” he told the jury. “The court’s final instructions will guide you to try to recognize your biases, recognize what we bring to the table and analyze the evidence from the perspective of the evidence itself.”
Translation: You, the jury, are biased against my client, you’re just too dumb to know it. He gets an “A” for effort on that one, by crossing the line IMO.
- Chauvin could not have committed murder because murder requires intent and no cop ever intends to murder when being captured on video.
Again with the gaslighting!!! It couldn’t be murder, because you saw it!
Posts: 39,624
Threads: 10,315
Joined: Jun 2025
Reputation:
2
sickening. It was murder.
Posts: 25,452
Threads: 2,519
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
0
I'm anxious about this pending decision. I thought the prosecution was very compelling. I just hope the jury sees it that way too. An acquittal is unimaginable but we've been there before.
Posts: 27,160
Threads: 2,805
Joined: May 2025
It is interesting what goes on in a jury room.
I served recently and it was nearly a hung jury because one juror that the police were unfair for not finding the defendant a place to live [he was a sex offender who moved into a house next to a daycare but put another address down on his registration]. She could understand that it was not the police's job to go apartment hunting.
I can only imagine what happens in a case like this one.
Posts: 22,231
Threads: 2,842
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
2
I can see an acquittal happening in this case, only because of reasonable doubt. (I don't agree with it at all, obviously, just saying I could see it happening -- though it really shouldn't.)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/20...vin-trial/
Posts: 32,462
Threads: 3,127
Joined: Apr 2025
Reputation:
0
PeterB wrote:
... only because of reasonable doubt. ...
What's interesting about reasonable doubt is that it opens the door to #whataboutism. Where that's countered is by the instruction to consider only evidence, not endless supposition.
Still, the defense clearly asked the jury to consider Chauvin's actions as being a reasonable officer ... quite specific in okaying his actions, and not really inviting the jury to dream up doubts at all.
They keep saying that police are not on trial, it's just this one guy, but of course they all are on trial here.
Posts: 22,231
Threads: 2,842
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
2
deckeda wrote:
[quote=PeterB]
... only because of reasonable doubt. ...
What's interesting about reasonable doubt is that it opens the door to #whataboutism. Where that's countered is by the instruction to consider only evidence, not endless supposition.
Still, the defense clearly asked the jury to consider Chauvin's actions as being a reasonable officer ... quite specific in okaying his actions, and not really inviting the jury to dream up doubts at all.
They keep saying that police are not on trial, it's just this one guy, but of course they all are on trial here.
I don't think it even requires whataboutism to say -- "police officers are people too" and "how can any of you say that, had you had been in that same situation, you might not have made the same mistake" ... which might have been a reasonable argument, had the police officer in this case not stood on George Floyd's neck for 9-1/2 minutes. Still, it only requires one juror to be irrational or empathetic to Chauvin, to result in a mistrial or an acquittal.
Posts: 4,698
Threads: 36
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
0
If found “not guilty,” it will be clear evidence that our system of justice is as broken as our legislature.
Posts: 25,452
Threads: 2,519
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
0
S. Pupp wrote:
If found “not guilty,” it will be clear evidence that our system of justice is as broken as our legislature.
I agree. I see no avenue for anyone to see that evidence and then acquit the officer. There would have to be a motive at play unrelated to the evidence.
As for empathizing, that only works against Chauvin because his sadism and lack of humanity are on full display.
Nobody on the Minneapolis force defended him IIRC.
Posts: 33,855
Threads: 2,463
Joined: Apr 2025
Reputation:
0
The only way to acquit the officer is to find policing as a profession guilty.
|
