Your taking the baton and run.ing down the road with it line a fool. I only stated that it's very likely that's what happened. Nowhere did I state that those same people will be honest in a different venue.
Why did you add so much phony addendum to what I said about the possibility of those witnesses simply not being truthful out of fear?
The problem with your assertion is that it is ridiculous. Seriously. There are 3,000 counties in this nation. That means a vast majority of them have County Coroners. Add to that the Cities, and State Coroners. But if that isn’t enough, you have Federal Coroners. Military Coroners.
And not one of them would say it was an overdose. Not one. According to you, it may be because they are afraid. Every single one of them was too afraid to tell the truth. Every single one of them was a coward according to you.
The idea of a conviction is that it is proven beyond a reasonable doubt. And it is not reasonable to believe that thousands of people, every single one of them is too afraid to speak truth. Especially when their job is literally to determine the truth about what happened to a deceased person.
The prosecution put forth an expert in Respiratory systems and ailments. This is the Doctor who the Hospital calls if you have difficulty breathing. This is the guy who knows more about breathing problems than any of us. Ok. He testified that yes it is possible to smother someone that way. And it would happen to anyone in that position no matter if they were on drugs or not.
The Defense, who was advised of this guy’s testimony, it is called Disclosure, you remember that from My Cousin Vinnie right? The Prosecution has to disclose any expert testimony and their reports to the Defense. The defense could not find a single expert to contradict that conclusion. Not one. Not a single one.
How reasonable does your doubt sound now? Two different fields, two different pools of experts and they couldn’t find one in either field to flatly state that Chauvin could not have killed Floyd.
They found a use of force expert, who claimed that the knee to the neck was a recognized and common practice. But even he had to admit that it was not normally used after the suspect was in custody, and part of the technique was to continually assess the Suspect to insure they were still OK.
That was the problem with the Defense Experts. They had to tell the truth. But it isn’t truth you are looking for. It is the fiction.
The Defense Coroner who said he would call the death undetermined because he couldn’t say what killed Floyd, said as a Medical Doctor he would not want to see someone kneeling on another for 9 minutes. He said he would expect that the kneeling would stop once Floyd stopped responding. He said that it was probable that Floyd would have been resuscitated if CPR had begun when Floyd lost consciousness, or when a pulse couldn’t be found.
This was the Defense Expert. The Defense Coroner. He slammed the last nails in the coffin that Chauvin put himself in. The Defense Coroner essentially proved the prosecutions case.
Now, back to Reasonable Doubt. You ask how reasonable it is to believe that people were afraid. The problem is that everyone has to be too afraid. Everyone. Every single person. Every coroner around the nation. Every Respiratory Doctor. Every use of force expert. Every single one has to be too afraid to tell your truth in your scenario.
Twelve Jurors, and every single one of them had to be motivated by fear, not one of them was courageous enough to stand up and say no, he would not vote to convict. Every single one.
Is it really reasonable to believe that every single person in this entire nation was too afraid to tell the truth? Every single one out of thousands of Coroners was too afraid? Even now, after the trial is done with, and Chauvin is serving his sentence, not one Coroner has reviewed the evidence and said he will testify that it was an overdose. Not one is attached to the request for a new trial. Not one.
You may be afraid of Black People. Others who agree with you may be motivated by such fear. But that is not reasonable to the rest of us who read, and listened to the evidence. Most of the time you all don’t know anything about the evidence. It was a show trial to you, and you would not consider otherwise. As far as you are concerned, “everyone knows” it was an overdose.
So I ask you, which argument has a reasonable doubt?
