Officer Chauvin files for an appeal

[Curried Goats]

Any person that I ever unfortunately have to shoot will likely already have rap sheet a mile long. I'm really not worried about it, but nice try.

Sure they will. That will help you when the mob comes for you.

 

[BothWings]

Sure they will. That will help you when the mob comes for you.

Ok, you fantasize about killing white people. We get it.
(yawn)

 

[Curried Goats]

Ok, you fantasize about killing white people. We get it.
(yawn)

You're the one with the fantasies my guy, I'm trying to get you to see reality. Floyd had a rap sheet a mile long and had just committed a crime and we still fucked up Chauvin's life and he was a cop. What chance would you have?

 

[BothWings]

You're the one with the fantasies my guy, I'm trying to get you to see reality. Floyd had a rap sheet a mile long and had just committed a crime and we still fucked up Chauvin's life and he was a cop. What chance would you have?

Every case is different "my guy".
Sometimes justice isn't properly delivered.
Nothing new.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The entire world did. They had BLM marches in Australia, England, and the fucking Netherlands. Some of the whitest people on earth were marching with BLM in their own countries.

Meanwhile you're screaming at the internet for a fair trial. Chauvin already got a trial cuck. You feel free to cry if you didn't think it was fair.

Apparently his lawyer didn't think it was fair either. That's why we have appeal courts. Sometimes the original court gets it wrong.

It's not so much about me than it is the Constitution. The Constitution guarantees us a fair and speedy trial by an unbiased jury and judge. That didn't happen in this case.

 

[BothWings]

You're the one with the fantasies my guy, I'm trying to get you to see reality. Floyd had a rap sheet a mile long and had just committed a crime and we still fucked up Chauvin's life and he was a cop. What chance would you have?

Cops getting pegged for murder is nothing new. Here's an OLD one right here.it all depends on evidence, WHO exactly is involved, the laws in the state where it happens WHO the witnesses are if any, and who's on the jury. You're just spewing liberal media nonsense trying to fan racist flames and pull some new blanket paradigm of "stupid" over America.

Daniel Bell - Encyclopedia of Milwaukee

The “signal shot for the black freedom movement in Milwaukee” began as a routine traffic stop. On February 2, 1958, Daniel Bell, a twenty-two year old

emke.uwm.edu

 

[Skylar]

Apparently his lawyer didn't think it was fair either. That's why we have appeal courts. Sometimes the original court gets it wrong.

It's not so much about me than it is the Constitution. The Constitution guarantees us a fair and speedy trial by an unbiased jury and judge. That didn't happen in this case.

It didn't happen in this case.....according to you.

The appeals courts are loath to overturn the judgment of a jury without significant evidence of tampering or errors from the judge. There's none in this case even alleged by the appeal.

This is a legal long shot.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It didn't happen in this case.....according to you.

The appeals courts are loath to overturn the judgment of a jury without significant evidence of tampering or errors from the judge. There's none in this case even alleged by the appeal.

This is a legal long shot.

Great. So why are Floyd people so upset that they are taking that shot?

 

[Skylar]

Great. So why are Floyd people so upset that they are taking that shot?

The man murdered someone they loved. They want this over.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The man murdered someone they loved. They want this over.

They will still get their revenge. Even if the verdict is overturned he will still be in prison for the civil rights charges.

The clown was amped up with twice the lethal dose of fentanyl, mixed with meth, a heart condition he apparently didn't give a shit about, so it's doubtful the officer murdered anybody. This was evident by the video of him sitting in back of the police car screaming he couldn't breathe. Chauvin's knee wasn't anywhere near him at that point.

If Floyd didn't have these multiple conditions I would agree with you the officer was totally responsible for his death. but it's hard to believe because for one, police used to use that method to subdue a suspect all the time years ago. Two is the fact that the jurors and witnesses were under threat had they sided with Chauvin in any way or form. The Governor even summoned the national guard for the day of the verdict. The people outside that court most likely had some of the people responsible for destroying that city and burning some of it down.

 

[Skylar]

They will still get their revenge. Even if the verdict is overturned he will still be in prison for the civil rights charges.

The clown was amped up with twice the lethal dose of fentanyl, mixed with meth, a heart condition he apparently didn't give a shit about, so it's doubtful the officer murdered anybody. This was evident by the video of him sitting in back of the police car screaming he couldn't breathe. Chauvin's knee wasn't anywhere near him at that point.

If Floyd didn't have these multiple conditions I would agree with you the officer was totally responsible for his death. but it's hard to believe because for one, police used to use that method to subdue a suspect all the time years ago. Two is the fact that the jurors and witnesses were under threat had they sided with Chauvin in any way or form. The Governor even summoned the national guard for the day of the verdict. The people outside that court most likely had some of the people responsible for destroying that city and burning some of it down.

Its highly unlikely that the verdict is being overturned. Chavin's people aren't arguing that the jury was given bad instructions. They are arguing against the judgment and conclusions of the jury.

That's a real uphill battle. Appeals courts really don't like overriding a jury's judgment. Your entire argument is to pretend that you know what the jury was thinking. You don't. And then to ignore their judgment and replace it with your own. None of that is a legal argument.

The issues of Floyd's 'conditions' you're raising have already been adjudicated. And the jury disagreed with you. If you agree with them or not, it doesn't matter. None of that is a legal argument either. Its just you insisting that you know better than the jury.

Which is gloriously irrelevant to any appeal.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Its highly unlikely that the verdict is being overturned. Chavin's people aren't arguing that the jury was given bad instructions. They are arguing against the judgment and conclusions of the jury.

That's a real uphill battle. Appeals courts really don't like overriding a jury's judgment. Your entire argument is to pretend that you know what the jury was thinking. You don't. And then to ignore their judgment and replace it with your own. None of that is a legal argument.

The issues of Floyd's 'conditions' you're raising have already been adjudicated. And the jury disagreed with you. If you agree with them or not, it doesn't matter. None of that is a legal argument either. Its just you insisting that you know better than the jury.

Which is gloriously irrelevant to any appeal.

No because the jury only judges on what's presented to them. If the medical examiner testified that he died because of the knee and not all the dope and medical conditions, then that's what they are to make judgements on. The medical examiner did not say he could have died from either/ or. Then it would have been up to the jury to decide what he died of. The closest the jury came to be in that position was the examiner hired by the defense who said cause of death was inconclusive.

But even if that was the case, they'd still have to be concerned about their safety and that of their family if the media somehow found the names of the juror(s) that ruled in Chauvin's favor. That's why the trial should have been moved out of that city right from the beginning.

 

[Skylar]

Also, this is appeal is from April of last year.

https://www.npr.org/2022/04/27/1095032337/derek-chauvin-george-floyd-appeal

If there were flagrant and egregious errors, or if the defense's argument was especially strong.....they would have ruled already.

No because the jury only judges on what's presented to them. If the medical examiner testified that he died because of the knee and not all the dope and medical conditions, then that's what they are to make judgements on. The medical examiner did not say he could have died from either/ or. Then it would have been up to the jury to decide what he died of. The closest the jury came to be in that position was the examiner hired by the defense who said cause of death was inconclusive.

Again, says you. None of this is within the scope of Chavin's appeal. You're trying to re-argue a case that's already been adjudicated, replacing the jury's judgment with your own.

That's not a legal argument. Its rhetorical cud....with zero relevance to the outcome of the appeal.

And with Chavin pleading guilty in Federal Court, Chavin's guilt isn't in question. Everything he stipulated to in the federal plea can be used against him in his state appeal.

Chavin admitted that he kept his knee on Floyd's neck, even after Floyd became unresponsive, resulting in his death.

That's another major stumbling block to his appeal. Its unlikely this is going anywhere.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Also, this is appeal is from April of last year.

https://www.npr.org/2022/04/27/1095032337/derek-chauvin-george-floyd-appeal

If there were flagrant and egregious errors, or if the defense's argument was especially strong.....they would have ruled already.


Again, says you. None of this is within the scope of Chavin's appeal. You're trying to re-argue a case that's already been adjudicated, replacing the jury's judgment with your own.

That's not a legal argument. Its rhetorical cud....with zero relevance to the outcome of the appeal.

And with Chavin pleading guilty in Federal Court, Chavin's guilt isn't in question. Everything he stipulated to in the federal plea can be used against him in his state appeal.

Chavin admitted that he kept his knee on Floyd's neck, even after Floyd became unresponsive, resulting in his death.

That's another major stumbling block to his appeal. Its unlikely this is going anywhere.

It's not a question of whether he kept his knee on him or not, it's a question of whether he got a fair trial by an unbiased judge, jury and witnesses or not.

 

[Skylar]

It's not a question of whether he kept his knee on him or not, it's a question of whether he got a fair trial by an unbiased judge, jury and witnesses or not.

When Chavin has admitted that he kept his knee on his neck after he became unresponsive resulting in his death.....there's no question of his guilt. He's admitted to it.

This is an old appeal. The fact that its continuing drag into this year demonstrates an unremarkable argument.

 

[SavannahMann]

It's not a question of whether he kept his knee on him or not, it's a question of whether he got a fair trial by an unbiased judge, jury and witnesses or not.

Ok. Let’s compare and contrast. Tell me why OJ was found Not Guilty despite even more press coverage prior to the trial, and why Chauvin was found Guilty.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Ok. Let’s compare and contrast. Tell me why OJ was found Not Guilty despite even more press coverage prior to the trial, and why Chauvin was found Guilty.

I do believe his trail was moved if my memory serves me correctly. Nobody destroyed the town in riots where he murdered his wife and boyfriend. Uncivilized neanderthals were not outside waiting for a verdict or to get their hands on jurors if they didn't vote the way they wanted to. The Governor didn't have to call out the national guard on the day they did come to a decision. Witnesses didn't fear for their safety or lives if they didn't testify the way they wanted. OJ was a loved hero by football fans and the trial took so long that they just wanted to go the fuck home already.

 

[SavannahMann]

I do believe his trail was moved if my memory serves me correctly. Nobody destroyed the town in riots where he murdered his wife and boyfriend. Uncivilized neanderthals were not outside waiting for a verdict or to get their hands on jurors if they didn't vote the way they wanted to. The Governor didn't have to call out the national guard on the day they did come to a decision. Witnesses didn't fear for their safety or lives if they didn't testify the way they wanted. OJ was a loved hero by football fans and the trial took so long that they just wanted to go the fuck home already.

The biggest difference was the effectiveness of the Defense. First they attacked the integrity of the lead Detective. They asked him if he ever used the N word to describe African Americans. Remember this was after the Prosecution spent two days making sure everyone knew that Mark Furman was the lead Detective. The one investigator who was responsible for every bit of evidence.

When the Defense played the tape of the interview where Furman was moonlighting to provide information to an Author, every bit of testimony was suspect. He lied on the stand. And he was caught. What else would he have lied about?

The seeds of Reasonable doubt were planted.

Next came the experts. The Defense challenged every single piece of evidence. Even the DNA. At that time DNA was just a hair short of being Science Fiction. And the expert explained the chance of a DNA match was one in ten million. The Defense attacked. One in ten million was thirty people in California. It was three people within fifty miles of that Courtroom.

Every expert was challenged. Counter experts were called by the Defense. Police reports of other crimes in the neighborhood were produced.

Every shred of evidence was challenged. The honesty and integrity of the police was challenged.

If you have read the book Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil. You’ve read about Jim Williams. A Savannah legend. He lost the first trial for Murder and got a second trial on appeal. The lawyer for the second Trial was a Savannah Legend. Sonny Seiler. Sonny was able to cast doubt on the Prosecutions case. He showed in the official photographs of the crime scene where the cops were moving things around while they took pictures. He showed that the evidence was lost because the police lied.

Jim Williams was guilty. But his defense team won because they challenged every bit of evidence.

I can name more cases. The Nevada Bundy trial where the Feds were caught lying. Case dismissed with prejudice.

How many times have I written that Chauvin had two possible paths to being found Not Guilty. 1) Chauvin can challenge the cause of death. 2) Chauvin could demonstrate his actions were reasonable and justified and within policy.

Chauvin failed at both of those. His legal team didn’t do anything about the Pulmonary Expert. No counter expert, and a weak cross examination.

They let the evidence mount against them. They let good pitches slide right by into the strike zone.

The Chauvin Defense was dumb. They should have delayed. They should have been delaying even today. But there were anxious to get to court and tell their side of the story.

History shows us what successful defense in court looks like. Chauvin’s defense was. I’m a good guy doing my job.

Even now, the motions are filed by idiots. They would probably get a new trial if they could argue the Defense Lawyers were inept. Especially if they could attach some finding, or evidence, or testimony that was available and they missed. The motion doesn’t say that. It says biased judge and jury pool.

Chauvin needs new evidence. He doesn’t have any. He needs some expert to cast doubt on the position of the Prosecution. He needs something to show the determination by the Jury was in error.

He doesn’t have that. So what he is saying is if the same witnesses testified exactly the same way there would be a different outcome at a different court.

That is why I keep harping on the evidence and testimony. That Testimony would have convicted him if the Trial was held anywhere in the State.

The testimony was that damning. It was that effective.

We have had plenty of cops acquitted. And their trials were always vigorously defended. Counter experts were provided. The Prosecution Experts were impeached. Doubt was created. Often through mere rhetoric.

I love our Constitution. I even admire the principles our Legal System is based upon. Beyond a Reasonable Doubt. Hard to prosecute and hard to convict.

I said that Rittenhouse would be convicted. Then the Prosecution dropped the foundation charge of minor person in possession of a weapon. Without that, and I said it at the time. Rittenhouse was going to be acquitted.

I think the Bundy’s were idiots. But again a vigorous defense saw them acquitted. Because the Feds were caught in a blatant lie. I absolutely agree with the outcome and have said it many times.

If the Bundy’s had done as the Chauvin team did, they would have gotten Life in the Electric Chair.

OJ was a televised example of what great Defense Attorneys need to do. They need to attack every statement. Every piece of evidence. They need to produce experts to cast doubt on the story the Prosecution is telling.

It is up to the Jury if that doubt is reasonable.

I don’t think Chauvin is going to get a new trial. He needs something to warrant it. And he isn’t producing that. He needs an expert who says that Floyd’s death was a result of the drugs. He needs more than one really. He needs an expert to counter the claims of the respiratory expert.

When the Respiratory Expert testified that yes Chauvin put enough pressure on Floyd to kill him, and it would have killed anyone regardless of the other medical issues of Floyd, the Defense was basically. Are you sure?

By comparison, the Defense Coroner was a witness for the Prosecution by the end of the cross examination.

Want to argue that the Defense was inept. I’ll agree. Want to argue that Chauvin was represented by fools? I’ll agree. But arguing that the trial would be fair elsewhere. As if the Defense wouldn’t be so bad. That’s just crazy.

 

[Skylar]

The biggest difference was the effectiveness of the Defense. First they attacked the integrity of the lead Detective. They asked him if he ever used the N word to describe African Americans. Remember this was after the Prosecution spent two days making sure everyone knew that Mark Furman was the lead Detective. The one investigator who was responsible for every bit of evidence.

When the Defense played the tape of the interview where Furman was moonlighting to provide information to an Author, every bit of testimony was suspect. He lied on the stand. And he was caught. What else would he have lied about?

The seeds of Reasonable doubt were planted.

Next came the experts. The Defense challenged every single piece of evidence. Even the DNA. At that time DNA was just a hair short of being Science Fiction. And the expert explained the chance of a DNA match was one in ten million. The Defense attacked. One in ten million was thirty people in California. It was three people within fifty miles of that Courtroom.

Every expert was challenged. Counter experts were called by the Defense. Police reports of other crimes in the neighborhood were produced.

Every shred of evidence was challenged. The honesty and integrity of the police was challenged.

If you have read the book Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil. You’ve read about Jim Williams. A Savannah legend. He lost the first trial for Murder and got a second trial on appeal. The lawyer for the second Trial was a Savannah Legend. Sonny Seiler. Sonny was able to cast doubt on the Prosecutions case. He showed in the official photographs of the crime scene where the cops were moving things around while they took pictures. He showed that the evidence was lost because the police lied.

Jim Williams was guilty. But his defense team won because they challenged every bit of evidence.

I can name more cases. The Nevada Bundy trial where the Feds were caught lying. Case dismissed with prejudice.

How many times have I written that Chauvin had two possible paths to being found Not Guilty. 1) Chauvin can challenge the cause of death. 2) Chauvin could demonstrate his actions were reasonable and justified and within policy.

Several huge problems with that analysis. First, these issues were already adjudicated. The jury found Chauvin guilty of murder. Making any 'challenge on cause of death' or 'reasonable and justified' claims moot. The jury rejected it.

They are also outside the scope of his appeal. So double moot.

Second, Chauvin already admitted in his federal plea that he knelt on Floyd's neck even after he'd become unresponsive, resulting in his death. That's a matter of record now.

Nixing any 'cause of death' challenges yet again.

Third, Chauvin plead guilt of depriving Floyd of his civil rights. There's no legal argument that criminally violating someone's civil rights were 'reasonable and justified'.