Faun
Diamond Member
- Nov 14, 2011
- 126,711
- 98,396
- 3,635
I know this.
Which means he killed Floyd without following police procedures.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I know this.
Where does it say he changed his report to include neck compression you dumb Bingo?
He testified that public pressure and anger had nothing to do with his conclusions.
He also testified that he'd never seen neck compression before and consulted Mitchell's opinion before making his report.
It was Mitchell's expertise on neck compression that was relevant to his report not public pressure.
I did not say “Pre-report”, I said “pre-release”.You claim there is some pre report that doesn't include neck compression. Where is that?
I linked the article for you and you know where it is. Go and read the fucking thing.He didn't change it you dumb, racist, Bingo. If you claim to know this for a fact and have seen the changes then show us what Baker initially said and then show us the changes.
Exactly.You said you believe he’s wrong.
He never changed his conclusion that this was a homicide.
Answer my question.You believe he’s wrong about his conclusion that this was a homicide. You believe this, despite having no experience in pathology.
It’t a fact he didn’t follow procedures. It’s not a proven fact that this is what killed Floyd.Which means he killed Floyd without following police procedures.
No. I’m claiming that a competent medical expert is more likely to be correct compared to someone who has no medical experience and claims that the medical expert is wrong.
I never said he was wrong.
You said you believe he’s wrong.
Great. So now that we have that cleared up, putting it all together now: I’m claiming that a competent medical expert is more likely to be correct compared to someone who has no medical experience and believes that the medical expert is wrong.Exactly.
Have you acknowledged how ridiculous it is to argue that you believe the medical expert is wrong about his conclusion despite the fact that you have no experience in pathology? How is that intelligent?I know this and have already acknowledged it.
Nothing was charged.The first autopsy didn't say that. It was changed under pressure by some doctors
![]()
George Floyd's Autopsy and the Structural Gaslighting of America
The weaponization of medical language emboldened white supremacy with the authority of the white coat. How will we stop it from happening again?blogs.scientificamerican.com
Yes there was charged. And yes the autopsy was changedNothing was charged.
Yes there was charged. And yes the autopsy was changed
I did. It says nothing about him changing the conclusions of his report due to pressure. Nor does it say anything about there being a pre autopsy report. You're taken one poorly written sentence and running wild with it like a desperate and thirsty Bingo.I linked the article for you and you know where it is. Go and read the fucking thing.
Innocent as the day is long.It's sad that this man will spend 2 decades in prison not because he's guilty, but because a jury was terrified of the ramifications of setting him free.
Yes, the opinion of the ME, the DA, and the Jury...Opinion.
14 witnesses said he did.He didn’t have his hands up when he was shot.
Nope, it was evidence that was reviewed and considered as part of the autopsy, and part of the final finding.That’s not forensic evidence, that’s circumstantial evidence.
Yup. Seven figures. That's what he had.You said “millions”.
Innocent as the day is long.
![]()
![]()
That's a lie the first autopsy reported Floyd died of overdose.No. The autopsy was recorded and the defense expert viewed the tape.
That's a lie the first autopsy reported Floyd died of overdose.
Okay.Great. So now that we have that cleared up, putting it all together now: I’m claiming that a competent medical expert is more likely to be correct compared to someone who has no medical experience and believes that the medical expert is wrong.
Have you answered my question?Have you acknowledged how ridiculous it is to argue that you believe the medical expert is wrong about his conclusion despite the fact that you have no experience in pathology? How is that intelligent?