GUILTY MN - George Floyd, 46, died, Minneapolis, 25 May 2020 #18 - Chauvin Closing & Deliberations #1

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Backing up a bit, I was struck by the detail Nelson presented about how much attention Chauvin had to pay to the condition of the crowd in order to assess what might happen....but never (or only briefly) mentioned paying attention to Mr Floyd’s condition and what might happen.
JMO
This crowd issue really hits a nerve with me. The crowd was upset because DC was not offering basic medical aid to a dying man. It's not like they were protesting something unrelated and were attacking the cops out of anger. They were upset and yelling because he was not helping GF and instead kneeling on him after he was unresponsive.
 
3rd degree - the death of GF by an intentional act...

2nd degree while commiting a felony... intentionally applied unlawful force .... (part of the assault in 3rd degree)

So, both require intent to find guilty?

that is from the State's graphic:

View attachment 293388
That’s the way I’m reading it. Though none require the intent to commit murder, those two require some element of intent. JMO
 
View attachment 293385

intent is mentioned in charges.

Intent is listed in the elements necessary to convict.

For instance: The third element pertaining to the 2nd Degree Murder charge:

The Defendant, at the time of causing the death of George Floyd, was committing or attempting to commit the felony offense of Assault in the Third Degree:

The Defendant assaulted George Floyd - intentionally applied unlawful force to Mr. Floyd without his consent, resulting in bodily harm.
The Defendant inflicted substantial bodily harm on George Floyd.

IMO, the State proved that element (and all other elements) beyond a reasonable doubt.
 
Nelson is saying Floyd was actually in the side recovery position for the first two minutes on the ground. So how does that change what happened in the remaining 7+ minutes?

ETA: Nelson is saying that the prosecution showing only moment in time is misleading.
 
View attachment 293385

intent is mentioned in charges.
SO... if these are the charges given to the jury, it seems like a conviction on the manslaughter is a no- brainer. I do not think a conviction on the 2nd degree murder charge is likely. It’s a possibility on the 3rd degree charge.... unless there’s that “ one juror”. Or two. JMO
 
That’s the way I’m reading it. Though none require the intent to commit murder, those two require some element of intent. JMO
Here we go again...instructions...that even trial watchers are totally confused by. I thought I understood them and now I am confused. This is why we have hung juries. Getting very nervous.
 
Here we go again...instructions...that even trial watchers are totally confused by. I thought I understood them and now I am confused. This is why we have hung juries. Getting very nervous.
I agree. I thought I understood them relatively well going into today. I’m not so sure either. Maybe seeing the written instructions will help. Hopefully.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
135
Guests online
471
Total visitors
606

Forum statistics

Threads
608,461
Messages
18,239,685
Members
234,376
Latest member
BredRick
Back
Top