George Floyd death / Derek Chauvin trial - Sidebar week 2

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
The counterfeit dollar bill set this in motion, but had DC not turned up then I’m sure that GF would not have died that particular evening. He managed to escalate a relatively mundane call into a situation where one man ends up dead. DC arrived with half the facts and just saw someone erratic and on drugs, he jumped to conclusions without evaluating the situation as it was happening. Now we have heard from the store assistant who served GF that day who said that he believed GF was not aware that the bill was fake, which is why he wanted him to come into the store away from the others in his car to talk about it.. he hadn’t knowingly committed the crime and that is probably the most heartbreaking testimony we’ve had.

The force used against him was completely unnecessary, he wasn’t threatening to harm them, he was pleading to be treated with dignity and not be harmed. He never had a weapon which completely throws Nelson’s ridiculous ‘gun battle’ example out the window. GF was an unarmed man, a vulnerable man who was under the influence however did not show any signs of active aggression nor any intention to physically harm the officers or the ‘crowd’. Then when he was at his most vulnerable - prone position, cuffed, and struggling for breath - Chauvin refused to provide medical aid, or Narcan or anything that would have possibly saved his life. He can’t use a ‘possible threat from GF’ defence when GF was not even responding and appeared to bystanders atleast to be dead.
 
For me, the one thing that could help the defence would be if DC testifies himself. However, I don’t think he feels any remorse and his defence team know that, so him getting on the stand would just show the jury his lack of emotion and he would come across as a cold hearted man who took the power of being a police officer to his head IMO. Amber Guyger testified at her trial and expressed emotion and remorse so it does happen. I just think DC is devoid of any feelings towards GF and what he did to him that day. If he testified he would shoot himself in the foot. All MOO of course.
 
The language used by the State and it's witness was to sway the jury into believing that "average" levels of methamphetamine and Fentanyl found here is not a big deal and are safe on the street. Nothing can be further from the truth. Imo, there's not a city, in this country where the 911 system is not taxed with calls where a person has overdosed by the "average" dose.
 
Here are my notes on the pills.

Item 48 - two pills from console of Mercedes, not complete tablets they had a portion that was cut off, could not read the monogram that was on it, appeared to be round tablets with nothing out of the ordinary. First tablet appeared to have a monogram of zero and a two, five (025) on one side and a capital P on the other side. The second tablet was a partial, round, white tablet that was monogramed three, two, five (325) on one side and capital R and capital P (RP) on the other side. The pills appeared to be consistent with one another.

Quantitative measurements: Ex. 628
First Pill
Fent <1%
Meth 1.9%

Second Pill
Fent <1%
Meth 2%

Item 51 - one pill found in the rear floor of the squad car. Partial tablet with no visual monogram with red staining on the tablet and a rough surface compared to the other two pills.

Quantitative measurements:
Fent <1%
Meth 2.9%

Street fent is typically <1% or slightly higher
Street meth is typically 90% - 100%
 
I have but one question, if the purity levels of both relevant drugs found in his system (meth and fentanyl) weren't different than what you'd find in prescribed pills AND the levels of either of or the combination of both was not high enough for an overdose can we move on to whether Chauvin's actions constituted manslaughter or some degre of murder? Because I'm getting tired of that dead horse and it's not what the trial is about IMO
 
Algo214 said:
I have but one question, if the purity levels of both relevant drugs found in his system (meth and fentanyl) weren't different than what you'd find in prescribed pills AND the levels of either of or the combination of both was not high enough for an overdose can we move on to whether Chauvin's actions constituted manslaughter or some degre of murder? Because I'm getting tired of that dead horse and it's not what the trial is about IMO
Click to expand...

As we know, it is all about discrediting the victim. Making it seem as if the victim 'deserved' or 'asked for' whatever crime was purported against them. Happens all the time.

My best friend's DIL is an ADA. They have 4 small children. She regularly prosecutes pedos and other nasties. While she doesn't discuss her cases, she says never in a million years would she be a defense attorney, not for all the money in the world. She wouldn't want that blight on her karma - defending the indefensible in any way that they possibly can.
 
missy1974 said:
I think I may have to try this tomorrow again, but will see if my son can do it to me! He is very similar to Chauvin's weight/height/size. I will have to show him the video and let him do his own perception of it and not tell him what to look for and see what he says. I am unsure if I will be able to convince him to do this :confused: I will report back if I can!
Click to expand...

Please be careful. It's not worth creating a haematoma just to prove a point.

Expanding Hematoma's Life-Threatening Neck and Face Emergency Management of Ballistic Injuries - PubMed.
 
Last edited:
SouthAussie said:
As we know, it is all about discrediting the victim. Making it seem as if the victim 'deserved' or 'asked for' whatever crime was purported against them. Happens all the time.

My best friend's DIL is an ADA. They have 4 small children. She regularly prosecutes pedos and other nasties. While she doesn't discuss her cases, she says never in a million years would she be a defense attorney, not for all the money in the world. She wouldn't want that blight on her karma - defending the indefensible in any way that they possibly can.
Click to expand...
A Defense Attorney doesn't necessarily defends the client and certainly does not defend or condone the crime committed, they are there to defend the Rule of Law, the right to a Fair Trial, that's why there is only so many defenses and exceptions you can use, specially in a Criminal Court: I didn't do it, I did it but I was allowed to (e.g self defense), someone else did it, I did something but it's something different (e.g charged with 3rd degree, aiming to get manslaughter).

That said, there is some crimes that I ain't defending, pedos or anything related to crime against children, "Sir/Ma'am please find someone else".
 
SouthAussie said:
As we know, it is all about discrediting the victim. Making it seem as if the victim 'deserved' or 'asked for' whatever crime was purported against them. Happens all the time.

My best friend's DIL is an ADA. They have 4 small children. She regularly prosecutes pedos and other nasties. While she doesn't discuss her cases, she says never in a million years would she be a defense attorney, not for all the money in the world. She wouldn't want that blight on her karma - defending the indefensible in any way that they possibly can.
Click to expand...

I could never envision myself as a criminal defense attorney
 
Algo214 said:
A Defense Attorney doesn't necessarily defends the client and certainly does not defend or condone the crime committed, they are there to defend the Rule of Law, the right to a Fair Trial, that's why there is only so many defenses and exceptions you can use, specially in a Criminal Court: I didn't do it, I did it but I was allowed to (e.g self defense), someone else did it, I did something but it's something different (e.g charged with 3rd degree, aiming to get manslaughter).

That said, there is some crimes that I ain't defending, pedos or anything related to crime against children, "Sir/Ma'am please find someone else".
Click to expand...

That's right. They try to create reasonable doubt. Via any means that they can.
In this case, Nelson is trying to create reasonable doubt through George's drug use, the 'unruly mob', the 'knee wasn't on the neck', and any other way that he can.
 
Algo214 said:
I have but one question, if the purity levels of both relevant drugs found in his system (meth and fentanyl) weren't different than what you'd find in prescribed pills AND the levels of either of or the combination of both was not high enough for an overdose can we move on to whether Chauvin's actions constituted manslaughter or some degre of murder? Because I'm getting tired of that dead horse and it's not what the trial is about IMO
Click to expand...
Sure, if he took 1 pill. How many did he take? Plus he had overdosed in March and had been "clean" since so his tolerance would have been lower.

I found it interesting that he was foaming at the mouth during the March overdose and he was doing the same here. IMO, he did overdose again but did it alone cause his death?
 
SouthAussie said:
That's right. They try to create reasonable doubt. Via any means that they can.
In this case, Nelson is trying to create reasonable doubt through George's drug use, the 'unruly mob', the 'knee wasn't on the neck', and any other way that he can.
Click to expand...
None of which, in my opinion, meet the standard of creating doubt in "a reasonable person in their most important affairs." (Paraphrasing Sec 611.02 MN Statutes)
The only one that would be remotely close to that is a drug overdose, but that goes out the window the second the drugs preceded the kneeling and there is no way the kneeling is not going to be found a substantial factor in his death.

But A for effort.
 
I'm trying to keep up.......

For those who have thus far leaned toward the defense side, what are your thoughts on both of DC's knees on GF?

Now its clear (imo) DC's hand wasn't in his pocket, but he was using that hand placement on his thigh to balance himself on GF.

Learning it was two knees, not the single knee we originally saw has me even more appalled.
 
Algo214 said:
None of which, in my opinion, meet the standard of creating doubt in "a reasonable person in their most important affairs." (Paraphrasing Sec 611.02 MN Statutes)
The only one that would be remotely close to that is a drug overdose, but that goes out the window the second the drugs preceded the kneeling and there is no way the kneeling is not going to be found a substantial factor in his death.

But A for effort.
Click to expand...

I think he is struggling too. He is digging as deep as he can to find anything for reasonable doubt. I imagine that Chauvin is going to go down for 3rd degree murder. My opinion at this point in time.
 
SouthAussie said:
I think he is struggling too. He is digging as deep as he can to find anything for reasonable doubt. I imagine that Chauvin is going to go down for 3rd degree murder. My opinion at this point in time.
Click to expand...
I would love to know what exactly would be needed to prove the "intent to cause serious bodily harm" (the felony they used for the 2nd degree unintentional figure).
For that reason alone I'm leaning 3rd degree, but if I was given those specific jury instructions that could change, there has been sufficient evidence already to infer intent although not so much as to the bodily harm.

EDIT: grammar-farts :p
 
Cubby said:
I'm trying to keep up.......

For those who have thus far leaned toward the defense side, what are your thoughts on both of DC's knees on GF?

Now its clear (imo) DC's hand wasn't in his pocket, but he was using that hand placement on his thigh to balance himself on GF.

Learning it was two knees, not the single knee we originally saw has me even more appalled.
Click to expand...
Chauvin had two knees on him at one point? Or are you referring to Keung's knee on his back? I missed the trial today but I'm catching up now.

At one point Chauvin kept repositioning his knee and applying more pressure by leaning forward and pressing his knee down further. At the same time Keung had his weight on Floyd's back. This was right before Floyd appeared to stop breathing and was unresponsive. (Also when the bystanders started sounding more and more urgent. Chauvin pulled out his mace and aimed it at them.) Keung removed his knee, but Chauvin kept right up until the paramedic told him to move.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 72 more.
Total: 255 (members: 73, guests: 182)

Online statistics

Members online
73
Guests online
182
Total visitors
255
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
609,492
Messages
18,254,811
Members
234,664
Latest member
wrongplatform
Back
Top