After watching Law & Order on repeat for what seems like ever, my question to the defense attorney would be "Let's say he had drugs in his system (or whatever nonsense he was saying caused his death), why didn't you help him to ensure he would go to trial and rot in jail?" Isn't that depraved indifference? Even if Floyd was guilty and a drug addict, Chauvin and his merry band of idiots did NOTHING to help him.
USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
Cops: No Snarky Nor Positive Title
- Thread starter The Rube
- Start date
- Status
Who would call O.J.'s defense counsel incompetent? They did not have the facts to win that case, but they won anyway, never mind how.
Or were they referring to O.J.'s prosecutors?
Kepler
Cornell Big Red
The lawyers I know say the OJ trial is a spectacular example of a resistible force meeting a moveable object. He walked because there was only one Prosecution team that could be more incompetent than his Defense, but he fell into it.
I have no idea. I am just going by their mutually mocking opinions.
Handyman
Hug someone you care about...
I dont think I have ever met a lawyer who would say that. They might say his team were a bunch of jerks but they created reasonable doubt out of thin air. I mean most White People don't get a defense that works that well...
Methinks the lawyers you know are jealous ;^)
Methinks the lawyers you know are jealous ;^)
I'd be curious to know how many of them try cases regularly.
I'd also be curious to know what uno's wife thinks. Perhaps she doesn't care enough to voice an opinion. I certainly know lawyers who feel that way.
Jimjamesak
Already insane, UAA making it worse
How so?
I'm not sure specifically what dx is referring to, and I haven't watched the trial live, but there were reports last night that suggested that while the famous video of Chauvin seems to show him kneeling on Floyd's neck, still photos from a different angle suggest his knee may have actually been on Floyd's shoulder blades, which witnesses seemed to concede.
dxmnkd316
Lucia Apologist
The defense scored some major points from the prosecution witness. While he said that it seemed like an overuse of force, the defense got him to admit on the stand that it didn't appear to have his knee on his neck. That was pretty substantial and I'm surprised the prosecution didn't redirect with clips and stills showing the actual 9:29 and not the 30 seconds prior to it.
Edit: yes, what hovey said, except for the fact that the stills were out of context w/ regards to time.
Handyman
Hug someone you care about...
I dont think the jury is going to see much of a difference between where the knee was and I think if the prosecution spent a lot of time trying to explain things out it would have helped very little and probably would have been too in the weeds for the jury to care.
Good job out of the defense, but I don't think it scored that many points because of the end result. If Floyd had lived, that would have been enough for a jury to probably say the cop wasn't "excessive" but in a case where even fellow cops are saying he went to far I dont see it much mattering.
JMHO after the fact.
Good job out of the defense, but I don't think it scored that many points because of the end result. If Floyd had lived, that would have been enough for a jury to probably say the cop wasn't "excessive" but in a case where even fellow cops are saying he went to far I dont see it much mattering.
JMHO after the fact.
Kepler
Cornell Big Red
It does give a juror who wants to acquit a peg to hang it on, though. Some people are just looking for a rationalization.
unofan
Well-known member
Don't ever pretend to know what's going on in a juror's head, because they will decide based on something completely different than whatever you think.
My evidence prof in law school learned long ago from his days as an AUSA that you never want to know why the jury decided the way they did. He lost a case that should've been a slam dunk. He got a call the next day from one of the juror's who wanted to tell him why they decided the way they did. He begged off and said that's ok, I'm sure you had your reasons. Juror insisted, he begged off again, juror kept pounding away at it so finally he said fine. Juror said "We just didn't think it was fair that you got to put on all your evidence and the other side didn't."
That's right, the defense's choice to not put on evidence earned them the acquittal.
A family friend was on a jury 40 or 50 years ago for some minor civil case as a 20-something recent college grad. She voted for the side with the better looking attorney.
Last edited:
FadeToBlack&Gold
Kettle Medallion
Years ago, my mom was a juror in a drug possession case. The prosecution had all the evidence and testimony to get an easy conviction. The jury ended up deliberating for a day and half because there was a juror who wanted to acquit in a show of jury nullification against drug possession laws, and he initially convinced a couple others to go along with him.
dxmnkd316
Lucia Apologist
And the prosecution just scored a major goal.
The use of force expert from the LAPD said that it's not necessarily the knee to the neck, it's the fact that he was using downward force on the upper torso. That alone is what can cause someone to suffocate.
By the way, the other day when they were asking about the specifics of the prone position with handcuffs, they said that putting hands behinds someone's back can cause their breathing to become difficult. I encourage everyone to try this. Put your wrists tightly together behind your back and try breathing even sitting up straight. It's markedly more difficult. Now try it on the floor face down. Now imagine a 170+ lb person kneeling on your back.
If any of the jurors did even the wrists behind the back thing, I don't see how they do anything but vote to convict. It's shocking. Especially when followed by several days of top cops saying "YOU NEED TO GET THEM ON THEIR SIDE ASAP!!!"
The use of force expert from the LAPD said that it's not necessarily the knee to the neck, it's the fact that he was using downward force on the upper torso. That alone is what can cause someone to suffocate.
By the way, the other day when they were asking about the specifics of the prone position with handcuffs, they said that putting hands behinds someone's back can cause their breathing to become difficult. I encourage everyone to try this. Put your wrists tightly together behind your back and try breathing even sitting up straight. It's markedly more difficult. Now try it on the floor face down. Now imagine a 170+ lb person kneeling on your back.
If any of the jurors did even the wrists behind the back thing, I don't see how they do anything but vote to convict. It's shocking. Especially when followed by several days of top cops saying "YOU NEED TO GET THEM ON THEIR SIDE ASAP!!!"
dxmnkd316
Lucia Apologist
Remember everyone, if you're ever facing a jury, these are your peers.
fuck me that's bad, uno
You’re underselling the weight factor. He’s 170+ and then add in the weight of all his paramilitary gear that cops equip these days. That’s a solid 15+ pounds. It may not sound like much, but when you’re at your limit it means the world.
Deutsche Gopher Fan
Registered User
Nyt says defense today said “I can’t breathe” was a form of resisting arrest
dxmnkd316
Lucia Apologist
One of the prosecution witnesses said it could be upwards of 30 lbs easily.
100% agree. It's a lot.
- Status