Officer Chauvin files for an appeal

Both claims don‘t have to be equally likely. The fact that one ME said he died due to aphys….aphysiation…whatever…brought on by a drug overdose was enough for reasonable doubt.
So do you think that medical examiner lied when he said that Floyd was killed by Chaubin?
 
I don’t have evidence that he didn’t lie. What we do have are independent reports that agree with each other.

Are you trying to argue that both claims are therefore equally likely? That it’s equally likely that the medical examiner lied or told the truth in his report? LoL

If you are, that’s a really easy argument to knock down. I’ll be happy to do that for you if you want to go down that path.

The examiner was under pressure to satisfy the uncivilized neanderthals outside the court. And he would have every reason to be concerned about it. I would, you would, anybody would. And so yes, it's likely it played a part in his determination.
 
That was his opinion. Do you think the first medical examiner lied when he said he died due to drugs?
I’m asking for your opinion. Do you think the medical examiners lied in their reports?

He didn’t say Floyd died due to drugs. He specifically indicated that it was a homicide.
 
I don‘t hate all cops. I just don’t like the ones who murder people when it is completely unnecessary.
One in a million. There are also accountants, retail owners, car mechanics, a dozen Chicago lowlifes every weekend, etc., etc., who murder people when it isn’t completely necessary.
 
Then why is it other suspects survived just fine when officers did it to them? Oh, that's right, they didn't have a deadly amount of fentanyl in their system.

The practice wasn’t banned because the department was concerned about Fentanyl. It was banned because it was determined to be inherently dangerous.
 
The medical examiner is under pressure to find the true cause of death.

You guys just always want to whine that the results were rigged when you don’t get what you want.
No, we don’t like when someone is overcharged and convicted due to pressures from a threatening mob outside the courtroom.
 
Both claims don‘t have to be equally likely. The fact that one ME said he died due to aphys….aphysiation…whatever…brought on by a drug overdose was enough for reasonable doubt.

Great. Got a link to the report from the ME who supposedly said that? Because the Defense Expert at the trial didn’t say it. He said that he would rule the death undetermined and made a vague reference to car exhaust as a contributing factor.

So where is this ME report?
 
One in a million. There are also accountants, retail owners, car mechanics, a dozen Chicago lowlifes every weekend, etc., etc., who murder people when it isn’t completely necessary.
Correct.

I like mechanics who do their jobs well. I don’t like mechanics who murder people when it isn’t necessary.
 
Correct.

I like mechanics who do their jobs well. I don’t like mechanics who murder people when it isn’t necessary.
So we agree. We don’t like people who murder unnecessarily. But the way le are acting, it’s like it’s a special problem among cops. In reality, it’s exceedingly rare.
 
How was he overcharged? He killed Floyd according to the medical examiner reports.
That was THAT medical examiner, and there are different degrees of killing. He didn’t intend to kill him, if indeed his actions caused his death. A more reasoanble charge would have been voluntary manslaughter, and a term of a few years.
 
So we agree. We don’t like people who murder unnecessarily. But the way le are acting, it’s like it’s a special problem among cops. In reality, it’s exceedingly rare.
Completely agree.

Most cops are fine people. Most mechanics are fine people. There are some bad apples in any profession.

Chauvin is one of them.
 
That was THAT medical examiner, and there are different degrees of killing. He didn’t intend to kill him, if indeed his actions caused his death. A more reasoanble charge would have been voluntary manslaughter, and a term of a few years.
I agree that he didn’t intend to kill him. That would have been first degree murder, which he wasn’t charged with.

2nd degree murder basically indicates that he intended to do harm to Floyd, that he acted in a depraved manner, and killed him during that process. That seems fitting to me.

3rd degree murder also fits:

“(a) Whoever, without intent to effect the death of any person, causes the death of another by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life, is guilty of murder in the third degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 25 years.”

Both 2nd degree murder and 3rd degree murder specifically state that they don’t require the intent to kill. So what’s the problem with these?
 

Forum List

Back
Top