How can Derek Chauvin expect a fair trial in Minneapolis?

[Jarhyn]

Okay, seriously now, remember we heard that Chauvin and Floyd worked at the same place as bouncers? What's the follow-up to that in terms of understanding a possible motivation by Chauvin?

My take away from that was that Chauvin knew Floyd as burly and tough. Not the delicate flower Floyd was described as by later commentary.
Tom

Well either he is frail enough to have been capable of just dropping dead any second, or he was "burly and tough".

But the fact is, it doesn't matter how burly and tough or fragile you are when you have handcuffs on and someone kneeling on your neck. You're still going to be dead after 9 minutes of that regardless.

 

[TomC]

Okay, seriously now, remember we heard that Chauvin and Floyd worked at the same place as bouncers? What's the follow-up to that in terms of understanding a possible motivation by Chauvin?

My take away from that was that Chauvin knew Floyd as burly and tough. Not the delicate flower Floyd was described as by later commentary.
Tom

Well either he is frail enough to have been capable of just dropping dead any second, or he was "burly and tough".

But the fact is, it doesn't matter how burly and tough or fragile you are when you have handcuffs on and someone kneeling on your neck. You're still going to be dead after 9 minutes of that regardless.

It would, however, explain Chauvin's clear lapse of judgement better than many of the alternatives being presented.
Tom

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Okay, seriously now, remember we heard that Chauvin and Floyd worked at the same place as bouncers? What's the follow-up to that in terms of understanding a possible motivation by Chauvin?

My take away from that was that Chauvin knew Floyd as burly and tough. Not the delicate flower Floyd was described as by later commentary.
Tom

That's a bizarre takeaway. The nightclub owner said she often disagreed with Chauvin's tactics. She said that Chauvin "had a short fuse." Nothing about Floyd's tactics. And co-worker said that Chauvin and Floyd often disagreed about handling of people. The co-worker described Chauvin as being "extremely aggressive."

I'm trying to put this in context of the op which is a very narrow question about a fair trial. How can the trial be fair to the victim (i.e. the person who was killed) if this evidence isn't even presented? Was it a fake story? What's the evidence for that?

 

[TomC]

Okay, seriously now, remember we heard that Chauvin and Floyd worked at the same place as bouncers? What's the follow-up to that in terms of understanding a possible motivation by Chauvin?

My take away from that was that Chauvin knew Floyd as burly and tough. Not the delicate flower Floyd was described as by later commentary.
Tom

That's a bizarre takeaway. The nightclub owner said she often disagreed with Chauvin's tactics. She said that Chauvin "had a short fuse." Nothing about Floyd's tactics. And co-worker said that Chauvin and Floyd often disagreed about handling of people. The co-worker described Chauvin as being "extremely aggressive."

All of which is irrelevant to my post.
Coworkers opinions weren't part of the question I responded to.

Tom

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

That's a bizarre takeaway. The nightclub owner said she often disagreed with Chauvin's tactics. She said that Chauvin "had a short fuse." Nothing about Floyd's tactics. And co-worker said that Chauvin and Floyd often disagreed about handling of people. The co-worker described Chauvin as being "extremely aggressive."

All of which is irrelevant to my post.
Coworkers opinions weren't part of the question I responded to.

Tom

*ahem* The question was what was the "follow-up to that in terms of understanding a possible motivation by Chauvin?" Your post was dismissive by describing your own takeaway that did not identify serious issues and evidence in regard to our understanding of the motivation by Chauvin. Perhaps there was a misunderstanding, there. Okay, I will be fine with that.

Let me rephrase: what's the analytical follow-up to understanding of Chauvin's motivations? what are the ramifications of this evidence toward the charges on the table? what is the logical impact to the idea of a fair trial for either side?

In my view, it establishes a pattern of malicious feelings by Chauvin toward Floyd, IF the evidence is further examined to extract stories of the interactions under oath by witnesses such as co-workers and customers of the night club.

 

[Elixir]

It would, however, explain Chauvin's clear lapse of judgement better than many of the alternatives being presented.
Tom

What evidence do you have that this was a lapse of judgment? As far as I can tell, this is his default state.
It is not the first instance of his abuse of power or anything…

 

[Jarhyn]

Well either he is frail enough to have been capable of just dropping dead any second, or he was "burly and tough".

But the fact is, it doesn't matter how burly and tough or fragile you are when you have handcuffs on and someone kneeling on your neck. You're still going to be dead after 9 minutes of that regardless.

It would, however, explain Chauvin's clear lapse of judgement better than many of the alternatives being presented.
Tom

No. It wouldn't. As Don points out, Chauvin had a history of leaning on violence and apparent cruelty.

In fact, in light of that, it makes me wonder: of Floyd's problem with Chauvin was disagreement with his "extremely aggressive" tactics, it would make this murder even more repugnant: Chauvin murdering Floyd because Floyd had a history of asking him to be less violent.

It strikes me as reasonable in fact for Floyd to violently resist Chauvin, especially knowing what Chauvin liked to do to people. Not only do we have evidence of a murder here but in fact evidence of a social pathology.

 

[ZiprHead]

Okay, seriously now, remember we heard that Chauvin and Floyd worked at the same place as bouncers? What's the follow-up to that in terms of understanding a possible motivation by Chauvin?

My take away from that was that Chauvin knew Floyd as burly and tough. Not the delicate flower Floyd was described as by later commentary.
Tom

That's a bizarre takeaway. The nightclub owner said she often disagreed with Chauvin's tactics. She said that Chauvin "had a short fuse." Nothing about Floyd's tactics. And co-worker said that Chauvin and Floyd often disagreed about handling of people. The co-worker described Chauvin as being "extremely aggressive."

Chauvin has had 19 brutality complaints made against him with two reprimands. So he definitely has a violent past.

 

[Toni]

So I'm confused:

Is Dr Z saying that Chauvin had no choice but to kneel on Floyd's neck because he's a pale out of shape middle aged cop instead of looking like one of the village people?

Or is he saying that Chauvin was compelled to kneel on Floyd's neck because he was compelled to by his anger at bystanders who pled for Floyd's life?

 

[Toni]

Okay, seriously now, remember we heard that Chauvin and Floyd worked at the same place as bouncers? What's the follow-up to that in terms of understanding a possible motivation by Chauvin?

My take away from that was that Chauvin knew Floyd as burly and tough. Not the delicate flower Floyd was described as by later commentary.
Tom

I've never heard Floyd described as a delicate flower. He was a large, muscular man with a number of health issues. He was described as gentle and kind by people who knew him.

 

[TomC]

In my view, it establishes a pattern of malicious feelings by Chauvin toward Floyd, IF the evidence is further examined to extract stories of the interactions under oath by witnesses such as co-workers and customers of the night club.

Here's a quote from the owner:

She said that the two could have crossed paths, though Chauvin mostly worked outside as an off-duty officer, while Floyd primarily was inside as a bouncer. She wasn't sure if they knew each other.

Here's the thing. I'm not claiming anything much. I'm sure Chauvin acted wrongly, and against police department policy. But that isn't the same as murder 1.
That's about it. I'm also sure that Floyd made a batch of choices that hugely impacted his death. Exactly how much culpability either one has is for the court to decide.

And frankly, I also remember an eye witness to the George Brown shooting testifying under oath that Brown was shot in the back running away. So, no, I don't just believe everything anybody says.
Tom

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

In my view, it establishes a pattern of malicious feelings by Chauvin toward Floyd, IF the evidence is further examined to extract stories of the interactions under oath by witnesses such as co-workers and customers of the night club.

Here's a quote from the owner:

She said that the two could have crossed paths, though Chauvin mostly worked outside as an off-duty officer, while Floyd primarily was inside as a bouncer. She wasn't sure if they knew each other.

And the owner is probably busy doing paperwork and not observing all the bouncing occurring or interaction between outside and inside bouncers BECAUSE in the other link I gave, a co-worker (on-the-ground) talks about their interactions just as I summarized.

Here's the thing. I'm not claiming anything much. I'm sure Chauvin acted wrongly, and against police department policy. But that isn't the same as murder 1.

What about murder 2?
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.19

That's about it. I'm also sure that Floyd made a batch of choices that hugely impacted his death. Exactly how much culpability either one has is for the court to decide.

Great, but the purpose of this thread is to discuss whether or not there is a fair trial and as such, wouldn't this testimony by the co-worker and owner UNDER OATH with cross-examination count as evidence toward understanding Chauvin's patterns and emotional state toward Floyd whom he knew? Obviously, there ought to be employee record files too to prove they worked together at the same time, but the eyewitness testimony ought not be excluded or it wouldn't be fair. Yes or no?

 

[Toni]

In my view, it establishes a pattern of malicious feelings by Chauvin toward Floyd, IF the evidence is further examined to extract stories of the interactions under oath by witnesses such as co-workers and customers of the night club.

Here's a quote from the owner:

She said that the two could have crossed paths, though Chauvin mostly worked outside as an off-duty officer, while Floyd primarily was inside as a bouncer. She wasn't sure if they knew each other.

Here's the thing. I'm not claiming anything much. I'm sure Chauvin acted wrongly, and against police department policy. But that isn't the same as murder 1.
That's about it. I'm also sure that Floyd made a batch of choices that hugely impacted his death. Exactly how much culpability either one has is for the court to decide.

And frankly, I also remember an eye witness to the George Brown shooting testifying under oath that Brown was shot in the back running away. So, no, I don't just believe everything anybody says.
Tom

If you haven't already, I invite you to read the indictment against Chauvin. It describes the charges brought against Chauvin in the death of George Floyd. It lists the charges and also describes the legal definitions of those charges.


https://www.startribune.com/read-th...-minneapolis-officer-derek-chauvin/570991071/

 

[Derec]

He was described as gentle and kind by people who knew him.

Including the woman he robbed?

 

[ZiprHead]

He was described as gentle and kind by people who knew him.

Including the woman he robbed?

How about the woman that hired Chauvin as a security guard and said he would go overboard? How about the coworker who described him as violent?

 

[Toni]

He was described as gentle and kind by people who knew him.

Including the woman he robbed?

How about the woman that hired Chauvin as a security guard and said he would go overboard? How about the coworker who described him as violent?

How about the 19 excessive force charges against Chauvin?

 

[ZiprHead]

How about the woman that hired Chauvin as a security guard and said he would go overboard? How about the coworker who described him as violent?

How about the 19 excessive force charges against Chauvin?

And the two reprimands he received.

 

[Shadowy Man]

I'm trying to put this in context of the op which is a very narrow question about a fair trial. How can the trial be fair to the victim (i.e. the person who was killed) if this evidence isn't even presented? Was it a fake story? What's the evidence for that?

A trial is never fair for a murder victim because they don’t have the opportunity to testify on their own behalf.

 

[southernhybrid]

He was described as gentle and kind by people who knew him.

Including the woman he robbed?

I think he served time for that and came to regret it. Of course, some people can never see the better qualities in a person, but will never forget the mistakes that they made.

 

[southernhybrid]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/media/george-floyd-right-wing-media/2021/04/07/db58716c-9796-11eb-a6d0-13d207aadb78_story.html

Apparently those on the right are trying to make this the trial of George Floyd, by trying to dehumanize him and make it appear as if he was the one responsible for his own death.

In an appalling bit of shorthand, the riveting courtroom drama in Minneapolis has come to be called “the George Floyd trial.”
Floyd died in police custody last spring and is obviously not the one on trial. It was a Minneapolis police officer, Derek Chauvin, who knelt on his neck for more than nine unrelenting minutes, who now faces second- and third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter charges.
But some in right-wing media keep doing their utmost to make this tragedy about Floyd’s drug use and troubled life, in what seems like an attempt to absolve Chauvin long before the jury reaches a verdict. In effect, they are putting Floyd on trial.
It feels all too familiar. This is the “well, he was no angel” narrative, obliquely blaming the victim for his fate. It’s a narrative all too often applied to Black men who die at the hands of police.

In a recent opinion piece for Town Hall titled “Derek Chauvin, Human Sacrifice,” outrage-stoker Ann Coulter went so far as to misrepresent the basic facts. “The chief medical examiner’s report establishes that, however else Floyd died, it wasn’t from Chauvin’s knee,” she wrote.
Simply untrue: The Hennepin County medical examiner ruled Floyd’s death a homicide, as did a private autopsy. The county called the cause of his death “cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression.”

The article goes on to give other example of right wingers making it seem as if poor Chauvin can't get a fair trial. Gee. Where have we heard that before?