Florida State Seminoles

[innocentbystander]

The number one witness for the prosecution, she thinks that she is entitled to a safe space in the courtroom.

[eCat]

Was he responsible for the death of Floyd is clearly debatable.

Should this guy be a cop however is not. Too many men and women like him wearing the uniform that have disdain for the public they serve. It shouldn't take a trial over a man's life to determine whether a guy like Chauvin should have a badge.

[BigRedMan]

Dude should not be a cop but Floyd and his choices lead him to his own death. However, he did make his family rich so he has that for his legacy.

Well that and murals of himself cause we should do that to a guy that uses a gun to hold hostage a pregnant woman while his boys ransack and rob the place.

[Jungle Rat]

I wouldn't put too much stock into what Ann Coulter says when it comes to this sort of thing.

She is good at reading the pulse of heartland America, not so much in urban settings, however I will say I'm reading more than a few people saying the prosecution isn't making this the slam dunk most thought they would.

Its not just Ann.



The part about the defense wanting to recall a witness that testified for the prosecution because the testimony given is so damning for the state's case against Chauvin, well, yeah this isn't going very well.

Maybe they will convict? I don't know. I just don't think its likely at this point.

Where in the hell did this guy go to journalism school? Who taught him to talk like that? That's face punch material right there folks.

[Jungle Rat]

Overdose. Heh. That's not how this works. That's not how any of this works.

I am not a lawyer. I don't know how any of this works rat. But I can tell you after listening to THIS witness for the prosecution, I am damn sure that this is NOT the way it works.



Its usually a pretty good idea for the prosecution not to put a witness on the stand that is high.

By far not the 1st time. Still, has nothing to do with the fact Floyd was murdered. By a cop and his buddies. In broad daylight. On film. Being begged to stop. By many.

[hedge]

"Where in the hell did this guy go to journalism school? Who taught him to talk like that? That's face punch material right there folks."

Agreed. I'd like to stomp that little fucker's face into the pavement...

[Jungle Rat]

Are you talking about IB or the wanker on the video? Just a question. Either works for me.

[innocentbystander]

"Where in the hell did this guy go to journalism school? Who taught him to talk like that? That's face punch material right there folks."

Agreed. I'd like to stomp that little fucker's face into the pavement...

This witness didn't grow angrier and angrier. He grew professional and professional.



This trial is turning into a circus.

[innocentbystander]

Are you talking about IB or the wanker on the video? Just a question. Either works for me.

Oh I figured you guys liked these videos purely from a "content is king" perspective. Would you rather I stop rat?

[innocentbystander]

Dude should not be a cop but Floyd and his choices lead him to his own death. However, he did make his family rich so he has that for his legacy.

Well that and murals of himself cause we should do that to a guy that uses a gun to hold hostage a pregnant woman while his boys ransack and rob the place.

The thing is, all these witnesses for the prosecution that are giving their testimony, its almost entirely centered around the crime of "police guilty of upsetting bystanders." That seems to be what they are raging about, being angry at what they saw. Last time I checked "police upsetting bystanders" was not a felony, a misdemeanor, or even a civil infraction. Its not a crime. It just pisses snowflakes off who have always lived in a "safe space" and the safety of that space was taken from them for a moment.

This trial is morphing from a cop murdering a suspect into local witnesses wanting to "Cancel" Chauvin for upsetting them. Its cancel culture. This whole thing is reframed into bullshit that makes sense ONLY to Social Justice Warriors. But since cops taking away your safe space is not a crime, the prosecution (purely for political purposes) had to go after Chauvin for the crime of murder. Its the only one on the books.

I remember another bullshit trial about 14 years ago in North Carolina. It involved a DA (purely for political purposes) prosecuting 3 college Lacrosse players for the crime of being white, wealthy, and privileged? How did that turn out?

[eCat]

I don't think there is any reasonable sentence Chauvin can get that will prevent rioting, and the media is to blame for this. They have been ginning their viewers up describing their interpretation of courtroom testimony making it appear as if their is no doubt. If by chance he does get off and the now traditional riot focused cities aren't prepared for it then shame on them.

Millions of guns have been sold across this country and I'd say a large part of them were in direct response to what has transpired due to the Chauvin riots.

[eCat]

April 6

Anthony Fauci, the nation's top infectious diseases expert, on Tuesday said he is confident the mass vaccination effort underway in the United States will prevent another "explosion" of coronavirus cases and a fourth deadly wave of the pandemic.

"As long as we keep vaccinating people efficiently and effectively, I don't think that's gonna happen," Fauci said of a fourth wave during an appearance on MSNBC's Morning Joe. "That doesn't mean that we're not going to still see an increase in cases."

Fauci said it will "remain to be seen" if there is an uptick in cases or if it will "explode into a real surge" as more states reopen their economies and relax public health guidelines.

“I think that the vaccine is gonna prevent that from happening," he said.


April 7

The number of new Covid-19 cases has plateaued at a "disturbingly high level," and the US is at risk from a new surge, Dr. Anthony Fauci warned on Wednesday.
While lower than the peak earlier this year, there were still more than 61,000 new cases reported on Wednesday, according to data from Johns Hopkins University. And the lack of continued significant decreases in infections is a concern, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases told CNN's Anderson Cooper, particularly given the spread of variants.

[innocentbystander]

I don't think there is any reasonable sentence Chauvin can get that will prevent rioting, and the media is to blame for this. They have been ginning their viewers up describing their interpretation of courtroom testimony making it appear as if their is no doubt. If by chance he does get off and the now traditional riot focused cities aren't prepared for it then shame on them.

Millions of guns have been sold across this country and I'd say a large part of them were in direct response to what has transpired due to the Chauvin riots.

See that's the crux of it. Many-MANY more people are going to die in rioting at the end of this if the jury finds Chauvin "not guilty." And at this point, I would say that verdict is likely. So even if its just ONE of the twelve members of the jury think this show trial is all just bullshit, there is enormous pressure on that one person to convict so that the OTHER UNKNOWN people don't die in riots scattered across the country.

Think about that? Think about that civic responsibility here placed on the jurors? We have a permanent underclass of people (some so fucked up that they get HIGH before giving testimony in a murder trial) who will riot in the streets and burn shit (mostly, shit that is local to them) endangering not only their OWN lives, but the lives of innocent others, simply because they are unhappy and didn't get their way. That's it. And we know that is likely to happen because it has been happening since 1992. And knowing that, the jurors have to balance "criminal" justice against "social" justice and "political" justice.

Worrying about "social" justice and "political" justice instead of focusing solely on whether or not there was an actual crime takes a modern, 1st world nation, and morphs it into a 3rd world banana republic. I mean seriously, what the fuck are we doing here? No one, and I mean NO ONE is saying that Chauvin saw Floyd innocently and harmlessly walking down the street and Chauvin thought to himself, I think I am going to use my badge and authority and kill this useless guy today. Is there even one person here who doesn't think that George Floyd was a punk? Is there even one person here who would argue that George Floyd wasn't likely to be DEAD by his own hand in the next 5 or 10 years from a drug overdose if that wasn't what killed him? Is there even one person here who thought that George Floyd was a great father and model citizen in his community? Lastly, is there even one person here who wants to be a cop in Minneapolis (one where Floyd's "hood" is your beat?)

[eCat]

I think its fantasy that he is going to walk. He'll be found guilty of something, especially if the jury has multiple choices of charges against him to choose from.

The jury is made up four African Americans and two people who identify as mixed race, something like 8 women and 4 men. That might be a hung jury but I'd say all of them went into that trial believing he was guilty and the defense had to change their minds, at least 1 person to the point they'll stick to their guns against all the pressure exerted on them for 2 weeks during deliberation.

[innocentbystander]

I think its fantasy that he is going to walk. He'll be found guilty of something, especially if the jury has multiple choices of charges against him to choose from.

The jury is made up four African Americans and two people who identify as mixed race, something like 8 women and 4 men. That might be a hung jury but I'd say all of them went into that trial believing he was guilty and the defense had to change their minds, at least 1 person to the point they'll stick to their guns against all the pressure exerted on them for 2 weeks during deliberation.

You never know with a jury.

I have sat in a jury twice, both criminal cases, both when the courts were overwhelmed with crack cases in the early 90s, both involving a black man selling crack to undercover white police officers. Both times the defendant spoke on the stand but I wish he hadn't. One time the defendant tried to make that he was selling Epsum Salts to the cop. The other time the defendant said he had a twin brother from another country who sold the crack, a twin brother he and the defense team couldn't locate. In both instances, we had 11 of the 12 of us with a guilty verdict in just an hour. The one lone hold out was a white woman (both times) and she was crying (both times) and the reason she was crying we found out, she had a son who was on drugs (both times) and she couldn't give a guilty verdict because she didn't think drug use should be criminalized (both times.) Sometimes, things can be very personal when you are a juror. So in the first case, the 11 of us just waited her out (and it took a day) for her to finally give in and she reluctantly voted guilty. In the second case, not so much. That was a lot of yelling and screaming, something out of 12 Angry Men. And she just dug her heels in deeper and cried and it was a big mess. One of the people screaming at her was another woman (like 30 years older) saying "what the hell! You of ALL PEOPLE should want to put this son of a bitch behind bars!" It was really embarassing and unprofessional. I'm surprised the judge didn't have to get involved. Eventually, that won went guilty verdict as well.

But we did take it seriously. In neither case did any of us enter the jury room with a pre-conceived opinion of guilt or "not" guilty. I know I didn't. And I wanted to hear the defendant out. And I admired that in both cases, the defendant had balls enough to take the stand. Its just that the defense attorney was insane to allow that to happen given the lying testimony that I heard.

[eCat]

if I was reforming the justice system, I'd start with 2 things

1. The Attorney for the state cannot charge a person with multiple counts of similar charges for a single crime. For example, theft and possession of stolen property when a guy stole a car stereo. It serves a purpose - to get the person to plea as opposed to get their day in court and its biased against people that are accused. Now lets say he robbed a bank and then killed a teller, well clearly that is two separate charges that are only connected in the fact they happened in the same act. I know that would draw some challenges but piling on charges just to get a plea deal is bullshit.

also, I would allow anyone who is found innocent to seek defense cost relief thru an independent arbitration board. No day in court, just an abritration where he presents why he should be compensated and the state proposing why they brought him to trial. I don't believe everyone is entitled to defense cost relief if they are found innocent, but a guy who was just in the wrong place at the wrong time and ends up spending his life savings to pay for his defense should be compensated for that. That in turn would put pressure on the state to only take people to trial where there is no ambiguity in the case, and secondly it would have defense lawyers much more inclined to take on defendants and provide a better defense for those accused.

As a result of those two things, I would then support mandatory sentencing for many if not all charges, because you're less likely to see all this concurrent sentencing stuff.

The saying is you'd rather see 10 guilty men walk than 1 innocent go to jail, but the system doesn't seem that way to me, it seems to be that we want to get people in jail once they are accused and we're willing to wreck their lives in order to make it happen. I saw someone else say "we have a legal system, we don't have a justice system" and that really hit me after I thought about it.

At the end of the day , my approach would have more guilty people on the street, but it would improve the integrity of our justice system and make it about protecting the innocent, not trying to convict the accused.

[hedge]

What the hell is going on in Florida?

Florida Elections Commission general counsel arrested on child porn charges

https://www.tallahassee.com/story/news/ ... 137060002/

[innocentbystander]

if I was reforming the justice system, I'd start with 2 things

1. The Attorney for the state cannot charge a person with multiple counts of similar charges for a single crime. For example, theft and possession of stolen property when a guy stole a car stereo. It serves a purpose - to get the person to plea as opposed to get their day in court and its biased against people that are accused. Now lets say he robbed a bank and then killed a teller, well clearly that is two separate charges that are only connected in the fact they happened in the same act. I know that would draw some challenges but piling on charges just to get a plea deal is bullshit.

also, I would allow anyone who is found innocent to seek defense cost relief thru an independent arbitration board. No day in court, just an abritration where he presents why he should be compensated and the state proposing why they brought him to trial. I don't believe everyone is entitled to defense cost relief if they are found innocent, but a guy who was just in the wrong place at the wrong time and ends up spending his life savings to pay for his defense should be compensated for that. That in turn would put pressure on the state to only take people to trial where there is no ambiguity in the case, and secondly it would have defense lawyers much more inclined to take on defendants and provide a better defense for those accused.

As a result of those two things, I would then support mandatory sentencing for many if not all charges, because you're less likely to see all this concurrent sentencing stuff.

The saying is you'd rather see 10 guilty men walk than 1 innocent go to jail, but the system doesn't seem that way to me, it seems to be that we want to get people in jail once they are accused and we're willing to wreck their lives in order to make it happen. I saw someone else say "we have a legal system, we don't have a justice system" and that really hit me after I thought about it.

At the end of the day , my approach would have more guilty people on the street, but it would improve the integrity of our justice system and make it about protecting the innocent, not trying to convict the accused.

And this is EXACTLY where politics gets into it (specifically, liberalism.) There is a very shaky alliance among liberals with regards to politics that seems to come to an end when criminal justice is factored into it. I'll be specific.

Liberals tend to vote democrat and 3rd world minorities and feminists (usually white women) tend to be liberals. Okay, so politically they are allies. And they vote as a uniform block (usually.) But what about criminal justice?

You said you would rather see 10 guilty men walk than 1 innocent go to jail. I agree with you. But a feminist who is convinced those 10 guilty men are all just men who want to hold her down, and rape her, fuck her in the ass against her will, does NOT! She not only wants all 10 of them to go to prison, she doesn't care if 2 or 3 of them are innocent so long as 7 or 8 are guilty. She doesn't care because with feminism, men are disposable and valueless beyond their ability to create wealth. And in the world of #MeToo and #BelieveAllWomen then all ten are automatically guilty based on nothing other than accusation.

See how this goes?

Because of politics, people take to the streets and demand to "Defund the Police!" You will see liberals from all colors of the rainbow screaming that. But maybe half (the feminist half) only HALF want that because that same half demands that women (and ONLY women) should have the authority to throw the man of the house OUT of the house the minute she is afraid of him. That only happens with police showing up with guns drawn and pointing them at the man of the house. That is a cardinal virtue for feminism, the belief in law enforcement ridding a woman of a man so that she is "safe" in a domestic situation. Can't do that with a defunded police department.

Politics should not enter into criminal justice. I think a crime is a crime. What you are thinking or believing when you act out the crime, should not have any bearing on the weight of justice. But we have entirely politicized criminal justice to the point where this whole thing is ridiculous. So we talk past each other because we don't take the time to break things down into bite sizes pieces of criminal justice the way I just did now.

[innocentbystander]

What the hell is going on in Florida?

Florida Elections Commission general counsel arrested on child porn charges

https://www.tallahassee.com/story/news/ ... 137060002/

The only thing that surprises me about this is that it is Tallahassee and not Palm Beach where Epstein's girls monetize their pooty.

[DooKSucks]

I wouldn't put too much stock into what Ann Coulter says when it comes to this sort of thing.

She is good at reading the pulse of heartland America, not so much in urban settings, however I will say I'm reading more than a few people saying the prosecution isn't making this the slam dunk most thought they would.

Its not just Ann.



The part about the defense wanting to recall a witness that testified for the prosecution because the testimony given is so damning for the state's case against Chauvin, well, yeah this isn't going very well.

Maybe they will convict? I don't know. I just don't think its likely at this point.

You and that troll Shapiro know as much about trying a case as you do everything else: absolutely nothing