Murderer Chauvin loses appeal

[Ghost of a Rider]

Nope, what?

To your question.

Nope you don’t think he was objective, nope it’s not correct that he wasn’t objective, or nope you don’t want to answer the question? You said you were going to elaborate on your position and I’m still wondering what your answer is.

You haven’t answered my questions so why should I care?

Instead of answering the questions, all you did was dodge them with the excuse that you didn’t understand - not the questions - but my position, and because you assumed I was just trying to “muddy the conversation”

Answering a stand-alone question did not require an understanding of my position. All I ask is why you think his knowledge and expertise is relevant when you know I don’t question them and you know I don’t think his findings were wrong because of incompetence.

I’ll ask again: Are you saying that he was not objective in his conclusion that this was a homicide?

That was not the original question. The original question to which my response was “Nope” was:

“So you’re arguing that he didn’t use his expertise in pathology to come to his conclusion.”

 

[Curried Goats]

You do approve of the slaughter and beheading of innocent civilian Israeli men, women and children, don’t you?

Nope.

 

[K9Buck]

Supreme court rejects Chauvin’s appeal of George Floyd murder conviction

Decision affirms Minneapolis ex-police officer’s conviction for second-degree murder and sentence of over 20 years in prison

www.theguardian.com

Its a joke that he was allowed to appeal his sentence for murdering Mr Floyd. It must have been awful for the Floyds to relive this.
We all saw what happened. They should incrase the sentence for wasting court time.

Tommy, do you believe that Chauvin should be condemned to an eternity of suffering in Hell?

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Nope.

In the thread titled “Agreed?”, Unkotare asked the question in regard to the Hamas attack on Israel:

“Are we in agreement that this targeted attack on women, children, elderly civilians is wrong? Can't we at least agree on that much?”

Your response in Post #7:

“I don't care what happens to citizens from an apartheid State.”


Agreed?

 

[Curried Goats]

In the thread titled “Agreed?”, Unkotare asked the question in regard to the Hamas attack on Israel:

“Are we in agreement that this targeted attack on women, children, elderly civilians is wrong? Can't we at least agree on that much?”

Your response in Post #7:

“I don't care what happens to citizens from an apartheid State.”


Agreed?

That's apathy not agreement you dipshit.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

That's apathy not agreement you dipshit.

When I expressed apathy about Washington owning slaves, you called me a deplorable mutant human piece of shit.

You’re a moral hypocrite.

 

[XponentialChaos]

That was not the original question. The original question to which my response was “Nope” was:

“So you’re arguing that he didn’t use his expertise in pathology to come to his conclusion.”

Do you believe he was objective in his conclusion that this was a homicide?

 

[The Duke]

Here's my take on that:

He should be in prison for 15-25 years but not for murder. Negligent homicide, yes.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Do you believe he was objective in his conclusion that this was a homicide?

That wasn’t the original question. And you haven’t answered mine anyway.

 

[XponentialChaos]

That wasn’t the original question.

You're correct - it's a different question. Do you believe he was objective in his conclusion that this was a homicide?

 

[Curried Goats]

When I expressed apathy about Washington owning slaves, you called me a deplorable mutant human piece of shit.

You’re a moral hypocrite.

The slaves weren't citizens of an apartheid State that was oppressing its neighbors and of course you were arguing for the veneration of Washington. I'm not arguing for the veneration of Hamas.

 

[JoeB131]

Irrelevant. You still think Darren Wilson is guilty of murder.

He plugged 8 rounds into an unarmed kid who had his hands up. Not sure what you would call it. Oh, you'd probably call it good police work.

You said he was accused for doing what everyone saw in the video which was kneeling on Floyd’s neck. This is not what he was accused of.

The only issue was whether or not that knee to his neck caused his death, which happened when the knee was on the neck. Three coroners testified that the knee to the neck caused his death.

The accused officer is a prick by most accounts. I have no love or special regard for Chauvin. I just don’t like what I see as conviction of murder in the court of public opinion or based on mere bad optics.

Except it wasn't bad optics.
Chauvin put a knee to the man's neck.
The man was screaming for his mother and saying he couldn't breathe
The man died.
Coroners testified that was the cause of death.
A jury agreed.

Sweet evil Jesus, man, every day poor people are sent to prison and sometimes death row because they had public defenders who didn't know what they were doing, or didn't have the resources to mount a decent defense, and you are upset that this cop who had millions of dollars in lawyers couldn't get past the fact he was caught on tape, doing exactly what he was accused of.

You do approve of the slaughter and beheading of innocent civilian Israeli men, women and children, don’t you?

No, but I'm not surprised when it happens. You oppress a people for 80 years, to the point where none of them remember a time when you weren't oppressing them, and then you wonder why they act out?

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

The slaves weren't citizens of an apartheid State that was oppressing its neighbors and of course you were arguing for the veneration of Washington. I'm not arguing for the veneration of Hamas.

Irrelevant. The point was apathy about an immoral event. And it was immoral, your opinions about a supposed aparteid state notwithstanding.

You excused an immoral act which makes you just as guilty as you claim I am.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Do you believe he was objective in his conclusion that this was a homicide?

You’re not getting anything else from me until you decide to play by your own rules.

Why do you still think my lack of knowledge and expertise in pathology is relevant when you know I didn’t question his or his competence?

 

[Curried Goats]

Irrelevant. The point was apathy about an immoral event. And it was immoral, your opinions about a supposed aparteid state notwithstanding.

You excused an immoral act which makes you just as guilty as you claim I am.

Guilty of what you dipshit? I was explaining the basis of my opinion. Feel free to have a different one you deplorable mutant.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

He plugged 8 rounds into an unarmed kid who had his hands up. Not sure what you would call it. Oh, you'd probably call it good police work.

Irrelevant. You still think he’s guilty even though he was acquitted.

The only issue was whether or not that knee to his neck caused his death, which happened when the knee was on the neck. Three coroners testified that the knee to the neck caused his death.

They didn’t testify to this based on evidence, they testified to this based merely on the visual of the knee on the neck.

As far as I know, no actual forensic evidence was found in the autopsy to prove this.

Except it wasn't bad optics.
Chauvin put a knee to the man's neck.
The man was screaming for his mother and saying he couldn't breathe

When he was still in his vehicle.

The man died.
Coroners testified that was the cause of death.
A jury agreed.

Doesn’t mean they were right.

Sweet evil Jesus, man, every day poor people are sent to prison and sometimes death row because they had public defenders who didn't know what they were doing, or didn't have the resources to mount a decent defense, and you are upset that this cop who had millions of dollars in lawyers couldn't get past the fact he was caught on tape, doing exactly what he was accused of.

How do you know he had “millions of dollars in lawyers”?

No, but I'm not surprised when it happens. You oppress a people for 80 years, to the point where none of them remember a time when you weren't oppressing them, and then you wonder why they act out?

That was addressed to Curried Goats, dumbass.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Guilty of what you dipshit?

Immorality (dipshit).

I was explaining the basis of my opinion.

It wasn’t an opinion, it was a declaration of disinterest in the immoral slaughter of innocent people because you accuse their leaders of aparteid.

Feel free to have a different one you deplorable mutant.

Different what?

 

[XponentialChaos]

Tell you what, I’ll elaborate on my position when you answer my questions.

You’re not getting anything else from me until you decide to play by your own rules.

Why do you still think my lack of knowledge and expertise in pathology is relevant when you know I didn’t question his or his competence?

I tried to answer your question to the best of my ability because you said you would elaborate on your position if I did. Looks like that was a lie. Maybe you can try re-wording your question and I’ll take another shot at it. I don’t expect you to be satisfied with my answer but I do expect you to stick to your word.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

I tried to answer your question to the best of my ability because you said you would elaborate on your position if I did.

But you didn’t. You made excuses instead. You pleaded subterfuge on my part on one question and confusion about my position on the other when understanding of my position was not needed to answer the question.

Let me ask another way: Why do you insist on bringing up my lack of knowledge in pathology when I never questioned the ME’s knowledge or competence in pathology?

I’ve told you numerous times that his competence has nothing to do with my views on the matter but you keep harping about my lack of knowledge anyway.

Looks like that was a lie.

Bullshit. This is a copout on your part.

Maybe you can try re-wording your question and I’ll take another shot at it. I don’t expect you to be satisfied with my answer but I do expect you to stick to your word.

And I expect you to answer my questions the same as you expect me to answer yours.

 

[XponentialChaos]

Let me ask another way: Why do you insist on bringing up my lack of knowledge in pathology when I never questioned the ME’s knowledge or competence in pathology?

I suspect that you may be questioning his knowledge or competence. I don’t know, however, as I’m not entirely sure I understand your argument. Hence the questions to better understand you.

Do you believe he was objective in his conclusion that this was a homicide?