Re: Derek Chauvin predictions
Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2021 7:17 pm
https://mibuzzboard.com:443/phpBB3/
https://mibuzzboard.com:443/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=57399
How do you know that it was the "correct" verdict? Did you watch every second of the case? Were you able to see proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the cop's actions killed George Floyd?MotorCityRadioFreak wrote: ↑Wed Apr 21, 2021 8:11 amPretty damn peaceful after the correct guilty verdict. Let's hope the sentencing is fair. Anything less than 20 years will be absurd.
Matt wrote: ↑Wed Apr 21, 2021 9:15 amHow do you know that it was the "correct" verdict? Did you watch every second of the case? Were you able to see proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the cop's actions killed George Floyd?MotorCityRadioFreak wrote: ↑Wed Apr 21, 2021 8:11 amPretty damn peaceful after the correct guilty verdict. Let's hope the sentencing is fair. Anything less than 20 years will be absurd.
Make up your mind.....
There's a difference between emphatically stating that the "correct" verdict was reached and commenting on the actual verdict. My comments yesterday were based on the verdict, not a premeditated decision I made based on not knowing all of the facts.Honeyman wrote: ↑Wed Apr 21, 2021 10:11 amMatt wrote: ↑Wed Apr 21, 2021 9:15 amHow do you know that it was the "correct" verdict? Did you watch every second of the case? Were you able to see proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the cop's actions killed George Floyd?MotorCityRadioFreak wrote: ↑Wed Apr 21, 2021 8:11 amPretty damn peaceful after the correct guilty verdict. Let's hope the sentencing is fair. Anything less than 20 years will be absurd.Make up your mind.....
Now you're just playing with semantics. It's called a "judgment" for a reason.Matt wrote: ↑Wed Apr 21, 2021 10:20 amThere's a difference between emphatically stating that the "correct" verdict was reached and commenting on the actual verdict. My comments yesterday were based on the verdict, not a premeditated decision I made based on not knowing all of the facts.Honeyman wrote: ↑Wed Apr 21, 2021 10:11 amMatt wrote: ↑Wed Apr 21, 2021 9:15 amHow do you know that it was the "correct" verdict? Did you watch every second of the case? Were you able to see proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the cop's actions killed George Floyd?MotorCityRadioFreak wrote: ↑Wed Apr 21, 2021 8:11 amPretty damn peaceful after the correct guilty verdict. Let's hope the sentencing is fair. Anything less than 20 years will be absurd.Make up your mind.....
I didn't follow the case closely enough to know one way or another. Based on my limited knowledge of the facts, I was surprised with the verdict, but my comments were purely fact-based. The jury found that Chauvin's actions lead to Floyd's death - that statement is indisputable. I think the following snippet from today's WSJ editorial speaks to what I'm trying to get at:bmw wrote: ↑Wed Apr 21, 2021 10:37 amI'm sorry Matt, but I see no difference between the context of each of your comments. You both stated that you believe that the cop's actions prematurely ended Floyd's life. What difference does it make at precisely what time each of you reached that conclusion? And are you saying that you had no opinion on this before the verdict was announced? Because that is how I interpret what you're saying here.
It would be nice to think all of this would prompt reflection among those who have exploited Floyd’s killing for political purposes. But it probably won’t. Even after the verdict, commentators who applauded the jury gave last year’s riots in American cities the credit for inspiring it.
Not the facts. Not the law. But lawless protests. If a large faction of Americans really believe that only mayhem in the streets can guarantee justice in America, then this verdict will mean little and we are in for far more unrest ahead.
On this point, President Biden has been little help, despite his inaugural pleas for unity and healing. On Tuesday before the verdict, Mr. Biden said he was “praying” for the jury to reach “the right verdict” and that the evidence was “overwhelming.” That’s an outrageous interference with the administration of justice. Though the jury was sequestered at the time, it’s possible word of his comments could have made it to the jury had their deliberations gone on. That could have been grounds for a mistrial.
His appeal based on Waters comments will fail. The jury was sequestered at the time so her words could not have influence over them.bmw wrote: ↑Wed Apr 21, 2021 11:01 amI didn't follow the case at all during the trial, but I do think that the video, which has been public for nearly a year now, speaks for itself, and for that reason, I don't have a problem with other people making their own judgments before the verdict was read. The exception here of course is public officials - what Biden and Waters said was beyond irresponsible (the latter of which will undoubtedly serve as grounds for appeal) - no public official had any business whatsoever commenting on what the verdict should be.
And as I said in another thread - will there be justice for all 25 people who died as a direct result of the riots? I doubt it.
These "brilliant" predictions did not age well.Mike Oxlong wrote: ↑Mon Apr 19, 2021 8:24 pmBidenBabe is right. No matter the verdict, there will be riots. If the police in the Twin Cities were smart, they'd all just stay away and let the town burn. It's gonna happen no matter what.