Fogbow

Chauvin has not been charged with "murder one" or "first degree murder."

sterngard friegen wrote: ↑Mon Apr 19, 2021 11:08 am

noblepa wrote: ↑Mon Apr 19, 2021 10:39 am IANAL, but it is my understanding that first degree murder requires that the defendant went into the situation with the intent of killing the victim; that the defendant planned the murder beforehand.

While I agree that Chauvin is guilty as hell, I'm not convinced it should be murder one.

Chauvin may very well have made the decision, after the encounter began, that he was going to "kill the SOB", but I seriously doubt that he got up that morning, thinking "I'm going to kill George Floyd today". It is my understanding that this is what the prosecution would have had to prove, with that level of specificity, in order to convict him of murder one.

That's incorrect. Intent to murder doesn't have to be formed "that morning" or "before the encounter." It only has to be formed before the murder. I'd say the 9 minutes and 29 seconds demonstrates that intent, the "malice aforethought."

It needn’t even have been the whole 9.5 minutes. I think a reasonable jury could infer that Chauvin formed the intent to kill around the time Floyd said he couldn’t breathe and Chauvin didn’t get up.

I really want to push back on the general consensus here that Schleicher is doing a bad job. This is not a personal injury case where cranking up the level of emotion is the whole point of closing. After a week of the defense throwing poop at the wall, the prosecution needs to systematically and methodically (and, yes, repeatedly) review the facts and the testimony to show that Derek Chauvin caused George Floyd's death. He's walking them through the defense's theories and closing them off, one by one. It's workmanlike and not glamorous, but it is effective.

I am quite sure we will see Blackwell on rebuttal to be George Floyd's voice. But as an appeal to the jury's common sense to get them to believe their own eyes and set aside the distractions put up by Chauvin's attorney, I think this closing works.

I think the prosecutor might be hitting his stride a little bit. His closing is getting better with time. He's getting into more nitty gritty and it seems he's better when he's getting more into details.

I should mention, I know that my feed is slower and I am seeing things probably several minutes later than others. I am finally at the part that FRP is talking about, one by one systematically closing down the various nonsensical defense theories. And I also have the opinion he's doing a good job at this point. I think he got a poor start though. But he's doing well now, IMO. Actually, quite well.

I can only judge from my own perspective. I was so bored I shut the tee vee off. Although I never tried a personal injury case, I think this is the ultimate personal injury case.

I have tried many commercial disputes. You never want to bore your jury.

Schleicher continues to stumble his way through a disorganized and meandering closing.

sterngard friegen wrote: ↑Mon Apr 19, 2021 12:03 pm Schleicher continues to stumble his way through a disorganized and meandering closing.

You're the one who said the jury would convict today because they don't want to be sequestered, Stern. By that logic, if it's so in-the-bag, what does Schleicher's performance even matter?

fierceredpanda wrote: ↑Mon Apr 19, 2021 12:15 pm

sterngard friegen wrote: ↑Mon Apr 19, 2021 12:03 pm Schleicher continues to stumble his way through a disorganized and meandering closing.

You're the one who said the jury would convict today because they don't want to be sequestered, Stern. By that logic, if it's so in-the-bag, what does Schleicher's performance even matter?

After repeating the same thing numerous times, Schleicher finally sat down. My prediction was based on a belief we'd have a competent closing argument. Even one of the CNN talking heads is criticizing the closing.

They said this morning before the closing arguments even started that Blackwell would be giving the second part, after Nelson.

From a non-lawyer standpoint, I agree it was boring, but I also think he went through each point with whatever visual aids he needed and put things in a nice, linear order to make his points. I suspect the jurors will see things from a little different perspective than an attorney does. Laying it out chronologically, step by step was very effective to me. I was surprised it lasted less than 2 hours though.

If y'all thought Schleicher wasn't good, Nelson sounds like he's pleading with the jury to find a reason to acquit.

fierceredpanda wrote: ↑Mon Apr 19, 2021 12:45 pm If y'all thought Schleicher wasn't good, Nelson sounds like he's pleading with the jury to find a reason to acquit.

Now he's just making shit up. Or he's too stupid to know the difference between carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide.

fierceredpanda wrote: ↑Mon Apr 19, 2021 12:45 pm If y'all thought Schleicher wasn't good, Nelson sounds like he's pleading with the jury to find a reason to acquit.

Nelson sounded bad until he made this point: How can Floyd's blood show 98% oxygenation when he supposedly died of lack of oxygen?

I didn't hear the prosecution explain that possible contradiction during the redirect of the breathing expert.

Nelson is now just bullshitting, throwing up one irrelevance after another. He should have saved the oxygenation argument for the end of his argument. He's just covered it up with verbal manure.

This thread is more interesting than the arguments.

sterngard friegen wrote: ↑Mon Apr 19, 2021 12:54 pm

fierceredpanda wrote: ↑Mon Apr 19, 2021 12:45 pm If y'all thought Schleicher wasn't good, Nelson sounds like he's pleading with the jury to find a reason to acquit.

Nelson sounded bad until he made this point: How can Floyd's blood show 98% oxygenation when he supposedly died of lack of oxygen?

I didn't hear the prosecution explain that possible contradiction during the redirect of the breathing expert.

I believe Tobin covered that with the mechanical asphyxia testimony? You have to be actively respiring to draw in carbon monoxide to die from it. George Floyd wasn't actively respiring with 3 people sitting on him.

Nelson keeps saying they couldn't get him in the car. They not only got him in the car, they pulled him all the way through it. One of them even says "let's take him out."

sugar magnolia wrote: ↑Mon Apr 19, 2021 12:30 pm They said this morning before the closing arguments even started that Blackwell would be giving the second part, after Nelson.

From a non-lawyer standpoint, I agree it was boring, but I also think he went through each point with whatever visual aids he needed and put things in a nice, linear order to make his points. I suspect the jurors will see things from a little different perspective than an attorney does. Laying it out chronologically, step by step was very effective to me. I was surprised it lasted less than 2 hours though.

I agree. I found the linear progression to be clarifying, esp about use of force and how that relates to the legal standard for all 3 charges.

I believe that the prosecution did a good job explaining what a reasonable officer would perceive and act.

It's stunning to me that Nelson is throwing the other officers under the bus. Nelson keeps mentioning things that video evidence directly contradicts, and that the Minneapolis training says not to do. Nelson, while trying to create doubt about the evidence keeps underlining that Chauvin's actions were brutal, unnecessary, and illegal.

Nelson: "The state keeps focusing on the 9 mins and 26 seconds."

Du'h.

LM K wrote: ↑Mon Apr 19, 2021 1:37 pm

sugar magnolia wrote: ↑Mon Apr 19, 2021 12:30 pm They said this morning before the closing arguments even started that Blackwell would be giving the second part, after Nelson.

From a non-lawyer standpoint, I agree it was boring, but I also think he went through each point with whatever visual aids he needed and put things in a nice, linear order to make his points. I suspect the jurors will see things from a little different perspective than an attorney does. Laying it out chronologically, step by step was very effective to me. I was surprised it lasted less than 2 hours though.

I agree. I found the linear progression to be clarifying, esp about use of force and how that relates to the legal standard for all 3 charges.

I believe that the prosecution did a good job explaining what a reasonable officer would perceive and act.

It's stunning to me that Nelson is throwing the other officers under the bus. Nelson keeps mentioning things that video evidence directly contradicts, and that the Minneapolis training says not to do. Nelson, while trying to create doubt about the evidence keeps underlining that Chauvin's actions were brutal, unnecessary, and illegal.

Nelson: "The state keeps focusing on the 9 mins and 26 seconds."

Du'h.

He also said a reasonable officer would take the entire 16 minutes prior to them bringing Floyd out of the car and down to the ground. That might be true of Keung and the other one, but Chauvin wasn't there for the prior 16 minutes.

sugar magnolia wrote: ↑Mon Apr 19, 2021 1:18 pm

sterngard friegen wrote: ↑Mon Apr 19, 2021 12:54 pm

fierceredpanda wrote: ↑Mon Apr 19, 2021 12:45 pm If y'all thought Schleicher wasn't good, Nelson sounds like he's pleading with the jury to find a reason to acquit.

Nelson sounded bad until he made this point: How can Floyd's blood show 98% oxygenation when he supposedly died of lack of oxygen?

I didn't hear the prosecution explain that possible contradiction during the redirect of the breathing expert.

I believe Tobin covered that with the mechanical asphyxia testimony? You have to be actively respiring to draw in carbon monoxide to die from it. George Floyd wasn't actively respiring with 3 people sitting on him.

When someone doesn't breath for several minutes, it doesn't matter that emergency respiration added oxygen to Floyd's blood. If anything, this highlights that Chauvin had the opportunity to raise Floyd's blood oxygen level using CPR and did the opposite.

Nelson: "If you are talking, your breathing." So, why did Chauvin stay on Floyd's neck when Floyd was no longer talking!?

Good lord.

LM K wrote: ↑Mon Apr 19, 2021 1:43 pm

sugar magnolia wrote: ↑Mon Apr 19, 2021 1:18 pm

sterngard friegen wrote: ↑Mon Apr 19, 2021 12:54 pm

Nelson sounded bad until he made this point: How can Floyd's blood show 98% oxygenation when he supposedly died of lack of oxygen?

I didn't hear the prosecution explain that possible contradiction during the redirect of the breathing expert.

I believe Tobin covered that with the mechanical asphyxia testimony? You have to be actively respiring to draw in carbon monoxide to die from it. George Floyd wasn't actively respiring with 3 people sitting on him.

When someone doesn't breath for several minutes, it doesn't matter that emergency respiration added oxygen to Floyd's blood. If anything, this highlights that Chauvin had the opportunity to raise Floyd's blood oxygen level using CPR and did the opposite.

Nelson: "If you are talking, your breathing." So, why did Chauvin stay on Floyd's neck when Floyd was no longer talking!?

Good lord.

Where is that in the evidence?

Nelson is stupid to show Floyd dying repeatedly.

Oh, and EMS coming, so Chauvin wasn't responsible to assist Floyd after he stopped breathing and had no pulse.

"A reasonable police officer" ... when another officer asks if they should turn Floyd over, Chauvin ignored his training. When another officer says Floyd has no pulse, Chauvin ignored his training. When a fellow officer points out that Floyd is passing out, Chauvin ignored his training.

How does any of that support that Chauvin was a "reasonable officer"?

sterngard friegen wrote: ↑Mon Apr 19, 2021 1:50 pm

LM K wrote: ↑Mon Apr 19, 2021 1:43 pm

sugar magnolia wrote: ↑Mon Apr 19, 2021 1:18 pm
I believe Tobin covered that with the mechanical asphyxia testimony? You have to be actively respiring to draw in carbon monoxide to die from it. George Floyd wasn't actively respiring with 3 people sitting on him.

When someone doesn't breath for several minutes, it doesn't matter that emergency respiration added oxygen to Floyd's blood. If anything, this highlights that Chauvin had the opportunity to raise Floyd's blood oxygen level using CPR and did the opposite.

Nelson: "If you are talking, your breathing." So, why did Chauvin stay on Floyd's neck when Floyd was no longer talking!?

Good lord.

Where is that in the evidence?

It's just my .02. If emergency respiration doesn't work, it's because the patient is dead. If you don't have a pulse, and reoxygenation doesn't work, it's because the body can't process oxygen anymore.

LM K wrote: ↑Mon Apr 19, 2021 1:51 pm Nelson is stupid to show Floyd dying repeatedly.

Oh, and EMS coming, so Chauvin wasn't responsible to assist Floyd after he stopped breathing and had no pulse.

"A reasonable police officer" ... when another officer asks if they should turn Floyd over, Chauvin ignored his training. When another officer says Floyd has no pulse, Chauvin ignored his training. When a fellow officer points out that Floyd is passing out, Chauvin ignored his training.

How does any of that support that Chauvin was a "reasonable officer"?

Even the cop in Chicago immediately rendered first aid to the 13 year old kid he shot.

filly wrote: ↑Mon Apr 19, 2021 2:06 pm

LM K wrote: ↑Mon Apr 19, 2021 1:51 pm Nelson is stupid to show Floyd dying repeatedly.

Oh, and EMS coming, so Chauvin wasn't responsible to assist Floyd after he stopped breathing and had no pulse.

"A reasonable police officer" ... when another officer asks if they should turn Floyd over, Chauvin ignored his training. When another officer says Floyd has no pulse, Chauvin ignored his training. When a fellow officer points out that Floyd is passing out, Chauvin ignored his training.

How does any of that support that Chauvin was a "reasonable officer"?

Even the cop in Chicago immediately rendered first aid to the 13 year old kid he shot.

Exactly.

Omg. Nelson just said that a reasonable officer has to do to weigh the cost/benefit of removing handcuffs. I guess large black men are a threat when dead.

It's a hundreds of years old racist trope is that black men have superhuman strength.

The prosecutor addressed this (unpassionately) in the first part of the State's closing.
Here's hoping Mr. Blackwell uses his expertise at eloquent passionate argument.