Scivillage.com Casual Discussion Science Forum

Full Version: Random thoughts/comments
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
(Apr 8, 2021 02:16 AM)Leigha Wrote: [ -> ]That “crowd” was not posing a threat. We all have access to the bystander and trial videos and can see that when the police asked them to step back, they did. Every time.

So, Floyd didn’t move at all for nearly four minutes and they didn’t  shift him to his side (protocol - don’t keep someone in the prone position and cuffed for too long), they didn’t see if he needs CPR or is dying...they just remain on top of him, and you find that acceptable? Well, the police chief didn’t find it acceptable and said as much on the stand. When in custody, they have a duty of care. This isn’t about emotions - I’ve learned this viewing the various testimonies of police officers in the trial. I’m not following “leftist media“ either - I’m watching on and off, the trial live and drawing my own conclusions based on witness testimony. Unless you think police officers testifying against Chauvin are perjuring themselves?

Not disputing that Floyd took a large amount of drugs that day, but why does that dismiss what Chauvin’s responsibility was to care for him (CPR, etc) once he was in custody?

Manslaughter seems fitting. Remember, Chauvin was set to offer a plea and accept ten years. Why, if he believes himself to be “innocent?”

Plot twist - Floyd’s gf testified that they bought pills that weren’t what they’re used to, from a guy named Maurice. If the shift of blame goes partially to him for Floyd’s death - that might cause a jury to acquit. We shall see...

One guy was being held back by another in the crowd and literally threatened the police with violence. The police have no way of knowing when a crowd will suddenly stop following orders, and we've seen a whole year of people literally attacking the police, even in lethal ambushes. You have to be extremely naive to not put two and two together.

Cite a source for that specific "protocol". You know, one that specifies what "too long" means. You can't because it's always a judgement call. One that was done 237 times over the previous five years, with 44 going unconscious, by the Minneapolis police alone. Only ignorance can pretend that this was a unique situation.

I find it acceptable for police to prioritize their own lives and safety over criminals. Don't you? o_O

The testimony of the police chief (a political appointment) was rebutted by the officer who trains in the use of force. And you're lying to yourself if you think your emotions are not involved, as your comprehension of the law and typical police protocol certainly is not. I think police are being asked very narrow questions by the prosecution, and this is borne out by their responses to the defense cross-examination. It's your emotional reaction that keeps you from seeing that the questions do not account for the whole situation. Yes, roll the guys over...unless there's a potential threat. Yes, check for a pulse...unless your attention is too divided by a potential threat.

Floyd taking three times the lethal dose of fentanyl is suicide, not manslaughter. How can you concede the former and not realize that the latter automatically follows? o_O There's no indication Chauvin was aware of Floyd's condition until too late, again, due to his situational attention on the potential threat of the crowd. And in a Covid pandemic, you'd be a moron to just assume he should give CPR.

Really? You're that naive? Innocent people who think they're about to be railroaded into long sentences consider making plea deals all the time.


Yes, Floyd's "friend" has now refused to testify, pleading the Fifth, as he could incriminate himself of not only giving Floyd the drugs but maybe even giving him the counterfeit $20 bill. That would make him the guilt party of not only manslaughter but also second degree murder (death in the commission of a crime). Guess what, only one person can be guilty of murder, unless they are accomplices. Meaning Chauvin couldn't be found guilty in Floyd's death.

That's how the law works, if anyone bothers to find out.
I don’t disagree on some of your points, and all it takes is just one person to see it as you do, and he’s acquitted.

This is why we have trials.
(Apr 8, 2021 03:52 AM)Leigha Wrote: [ -> ]This is why we have trials.

Yes, it is. So emotional reactions can be moderated by an examination of all the facts.
As well as biases.
(Apr 8, 2021 04:13 AM)Leigha Wrote: [ -> ]As well as biases.

All biases that do not comport with facts are emotionally driven.
The pulmonologist witness for the prosecution believes that Floyd died from a low level of oxygen going to his brain and his heart then stopped. He is positing that this was directly related to having a knee on his neck for a long duration, in the prone position with pressure on his back and the way the cuffs were squeezing. All of this prevented him from expanding his chest. It will be interesting what the defense does with this witness.

Wondering though if “expert” witnesses are basically educated guessers? How much weight do highly educated guesses have in criminal trials? I mean, he wasn’t there so the defense could say that anyone who wasn’t present is “just guessing” based on their education and work experience.
(Apr 8, 2021 07:18 PM)Leigha Wrote: [ -> ]The pulmonologist witness for the prosecution believes that Floyd died from a low level of oxygen going to his brain and his heart then stopped. He is positing that this was directly related to having a knee on his neck for a long duration, in the prone position with pressure on his back and the way the cuffs were squeezing. All of this prevented him from expanding his chest. It will be interesting what the defense does with this witness.

Wondering though if “expert” witnesses are basically educated guessers? How much weight do highly educated guesses have in criminal trials? I mean, he wasn’t there so the defense could say that anyone who wasn’t present is “just guessing” based on their education and work experience.

Bullshit. The medical examiner already found zero injury to Floyd's airway from the knee, and an overdose of Fentanyl, which the medical examiner verified, can impair breathing. This pulmonologist hasn't examined Floyd's body. Expert witnesses are paid because the lawyer knows how they are going to answer.


The defense has already asked for one witness for the prosecution to be added as a defense witness. That's how badly their cross-examination went for the prosecution. And remember that friend/drug dealer who pled the Fifth? You do know that the prosecution could have offered him an immunity deal to testify, right? Why didn't they? Likely because his testimony would implicate him in the death of Floyd instead of Chauvin. The prosecution knows that. They are refusing to prosecute the real guilty party.
Dr. Tobin, the pulmonologist for the prosecution, isn’t being paid and he basically ruled out that Fetanyl and/or pre-existing health conditions didn’t cause Floyd’s death.

The defense’s cross examination of Dr. Tobin seemed weak so I’m thinking today, was a “win” for the prosecution, all things considered.

I think the jury can only be expected to provide a verdict based on the evidence alone, not on what could have been brought in as additional evidence to help (or hurt) Chauvin’s case.
If, in the street, someone (coincidentally) about the same height and build as Chauvin tried to threaten me I'd laugh at him. If he ever tried the Charles Atlas course when the boys kicked sand in his face he should get a refund.
Floyd doesn't look like someone who ever had sand kicked in his face. Tall, good looking, charming - the kind of guy everybody likes except (possibly) guys (coincidentally) like Chauvin.

I'm stroking an albatross that has been with me since I was very young. I (later) had the chance to apologise - but I keep the albatross to remind me that jealousy can turn men into monsters.

If (for example) one of them had worked outside (in the cold) checking for drugs and booze as people entered a club and the other had worked inside (in the warm) being paid to be tall, good looking and charming and later the little guy knew exactly whose neck he was kneeling on - you'd have a motive.
It’s natural to wonder why someone commits a crime, any crime, but the prosecution isn’t required to prove a motive, I don’t think? Your take on it is curious, confused.