There was never a murder charge. Never. The fact they went for murder proves my point that this is politically motivated.
The guy followed his department’s protocol.
The only mistake he made was not medically assisting Floyd at a certain point.
It’s debatable if it’s even criminal or not considering Floyd’s condition.
But I realize that they have to send this guy away - so they probably will. But not for murder.
You realize that when someone kills someone as a result of a DUI accident the initially get charged without murder 1 right?
But he didnt. At all. Multiple people have testified to this.
DUI can’t be murder 1. States have DUI specific felony laws if you kill someone.
You would never be able to prove premeditation in a DUI. The mind isn’t even operating properly.
Copout (pun intended), so that you can never be wrong
I can’t breath, I can’t breath, I can’t breath and the chant echo’s till this day. RIP
More testimony to the contrary of our idealogues:
Again, everything below this is not my text. This software sucks for phones @dallascanes
“That’s cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression. That was my top line then. It would stay my top line now,” Baker said.
Floyd’s use of methamphetamine and fentanyl and his preexisting heart conditions were “not the direct causes of his death," he said.
Bill Smock, a police surgeon who said he frequently deals with fentanyl overdose cases, told the jury Thursday that Floyd showed no signs of suffering from a fentanyl overdose.
“We watch those videos, he’s breathing, he’s talking, he’s not snoring, he’s saying, ‘Please get off me, I can’t breathe.’ That is not a fentanyl overdose, that is someone begging to breathe,” Smock said.
Lindsey Thomas, a forensic pathologist who previously worked at the Hennepin County Medical Examiner’s office and was involved in training Baker, testified that the “mechanism” of Floyd’s death was asphyxia or low oxygen to the brain.
Sure, the medical examiner has his “career,” years of schooling and probably a few apprenticeships, but gsc has read lots of articles, Wikipedia and probably a few podcasts.
This is a tough one. Not sure who has more credibility.
I agree with this. My point is that most of those kinds of cases start as murder 1 because it’s always easier to reduce charges then to add more on later.
Who needs a medical license when you have YouTube, wiki and “experts” on this board? 
This is cute.
Everyone agrees asphyxia is the cause. But asphyxia doesn’t just happen on it’s own. There is a cause.
So the question really is- what’s more likely to cause asphyxia:
A knee to the rear neck/shoulder area (because certainly it wasn’t his throat)
Or ingesting 4x the amount of fentanyl known to kill an adult human male?
I think it’s the latter. I think even the doctors feel that way but they don’t want their houses burned down or their kids beaten up by the mob.
I think you don’t have a license to practice medicine.
The doc even said - and I thought this made sense - that Floyd didn’t even look like he was ODing. He was coherent. He wasn’t snoring, and he was begging to breathe.
You’re defending Chauvin’s actions while also saying you believe he’s guilty of manslaughter. It’s confusing.
I think this is a clue the doc is saying what he needs to say to protect himself.
From inside the store to the engagement in the car - Floyd exhibited many signs of being on drugs and OD’ing.
And you want to talk expert? I’m 8 years sober. I was up to an insane daily regimen at one point in my life and went through numerous detoxes.
I know a person OD’ing and high when I see one. Do you?
First of all, congratulations brother. That’s an unbelievably hard thing to do and I commend you for it.
Second, when you say you know when someone is ODing…ok…first, how do you know? Second, how can you truly know when you weren’t there?
Thanks, but I’ll trust medical doctor on this stuff.
Yes. They asked why they don’t make a guilty determination NOW, and he says because some evidence is to Chauvin’s favor, and it all needs to be reviewed, and he’s no rushinng to judgment.
Are you SERIOUSLY trying to tell me you weren’t wrong, because that is Stormfront levels of denial.
No- not a guilty determination. That’s not even what the prosecutor is allowed to do. That’s for a judge and/or jury.
They asked why haven’t you indicted yet. And his answer was essentially, there is evidence that exonerates Chauvin. Then suddenly- that went away.
Maybe you don’t understand the way a charging decisions works. It’s not, “we have 51% of the evidence implies guilt so let’s charge.”
It’s “can we get a conviction.” And apparently this prosecutor initially thought “nope”
Then the city burned. And then he said “yep”
Weakness.
Thank you.
Because I’ve overdosed. I’ve gone through with drawl. I’ve lost 10 friends and counting.
I’ve had family members that I drove to rehab while overdosing.
I’ve taken substance abuse training and I know the signs.
I started getting high at 12. Stopped at about 31/32. Right before the birth of my son. That’s 19 years of 1st hand experience. And I’m not talking just weed. Name it- I did it.
And I don’t say this to brag. I’m highly ashamed of this. Typing this gives me a pit in my stomach. But if anyone wants to challenge my knowledge of drugs or their effects on a human or how those effects manifest- go right ahead. I’ll turn into Marissa Tomei in My Cousin Vinny on the witness stand talking about positraction.
No GSC, you don’t understand how any of this works, and your gymnastics are pathetic.
The prosecutor said he was STARTING AN INVESTIGATION. Do you deny that?
The prosecutor said he DIDN’T WANT TO RUSH TO JUDGMENT. Do you deny that?
What are you even arguing here?!?
What I’m arguing is that- if a prosecutor says publicly that he has evidence that exonerates the suspect- that should be the end of the investigation.
He either misspoke or he changed his mind.
GSC allow me to abandon the topic for a moment - this is NOTHING to be ashamed of. So many people go through this, and as I’m sure you know, not many can make it out. Many end up in jail, dead, or both.
I get it’s difficult to talk about - but you should be proud that you are where you are. I admire you for even mentioning it.
…
Back to the topic at hand.
You’ve already admitted that based on what you’ve seen and know about the case, that Chauvin is guilty of manslaughter.
With this in mind, why are you so upset charges were brought in the first place? Your view makes the comments of the DA in the very beginning of this thing moot.
Again, based on your statement that you do believe Chauvin is guilty of manslaughter, the DA misspoke. He shouldn’t have said anything if there was still a chance charges could come.
I think it boils down to this.
You believe he is guilty because of an action he took.
I believe he’s guilty for failing to take an action.