Random thoughts/comments

In reality the gmo phobia is an expedient way of keeping cheap imports away from the UK (subsidised) farming industry. Truly independent organisations like the BBC have conspicuously never bothered to tackle myths about gmos. After cultivating gm phobia for many years we are faced with a solution to a problem that relies on genetic modification. Being British I am sure we can lie, cheat and generally weasel our way through it without any particular problem. Of 'Europe' - another country - I know nothng.

(Mar 28, 2021 11:37 PM)confused2 Wrote: [...] Being British I am sure we can lie, cheat and generally weasel our way through it without any particular problem. Of 'Europe' - another country - I know nothing.

Yes, the raucous divorce -- welcome back. That unholy, exogamous situation between a realm of the Anglophone world and the land of continental heathens is finally over.

Newspaper disclaimer: “I will not be responsible for debts incurred by anyone other than myself.” --Dealing with debt on separation or divorce

There is a personal grievance involved.
On arriving at Charles de Gaulle airport (that would be in France - on the continent) I asked an apparently nice tourist guide French lady for directions to a cheap hotel - and yes she knew it was our honeymoon - which turned out to be a hostel for people seeking asylum in France. The facilities were not great.

Happy Easter!

More Easter Bunny trauma..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEP4Lb5BF2k

Aw ^^

I've been watching natural disasters (or what seem to be) from around the world on YouTube.

https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/DopB8CtSn3E

I can't imagine watching my home floating away, disappearing into the sea.   As global warming increases, landslides may be triggered even more so from heavier rainfall events.

I've been thinking that ''lol'' doesn't really mean ''laugh out loud'' anymore...like it seems many people use it as a form of sarcasm when they dislike posts or when they merely find something lighthearted. Like it's lost its original ''value'' or something...I doubt anyone is ''laughing out loud,'' from what I can tell on Twitter for example, where everything is sarcasm galore. ha

Now, when something is truly funny, whether it be a post on a forum, social media or text - I'll reply Lmao, or hahaha. I don't use lol as it was originally intended - as a remark when something is funny. But, I do use it. A lot.

Do you agree? How do you tend to use lol?

I think the lolcat memes started the degradation of lol, as I've never seen a funny one, and they're kind of meh.

I agree, it's use nowadays is anything from slight amusement to derisive laughter. I also use "haha" to denote actual laughter.

Following off and on the Chauvin trial, and last week, the prosecution did quite well and third degree murder seemed...possible. But they’re falling down this week and the defense is picking away at their case - I’m leaning so far, towards manslaughter. Chauvin didn’t render care when he should have and violated police procedures, allowing Floyd to die, if we are to believe Floyd died from a drug overdose/cardiac arrest (if that is how he died) Floyd could’ve very well died from a combination of excessive force in restraining him coupled with cardiac arrest. (or the stress of excessive force could have sped up cardiac arrest if someone has overdosed) Kind of hard to reasonably believe that Floyd would have died regardless if Chauvin had continued excessive force for over nine minutes - what are the odds? (Reasonable odds)

His fellow officers testified that protocol requires you to stop using excessive force once the suspect stops resisting. In this case too, he/they should have moved Floyd to his side to alleviate his breathing. Manslaughter is about negligence whereas third degree murder indicates possible depravity in someone’s mind (a defendant’s mind). Both show no “intent” to kill but both offer different causes, I guess. What a difference a week makes.

That said, Floyd’s autopsy report showed cause of death as homicide so not sure if that matters during a trial or as to how one comes to a verdict, considering it’s a piece of evidence like all evidence?

An acquittal seems unlikely because even if Chauvin didn’t intend to kill Floyd, he had many points throughout the arrest to diffuse the situation, alleviate breathing and basically, adhere to police protocol regarding excessive force. He just was completely negligent once Floyd was on the ground. So, an acquittal would be a head scratcher but juries are sometimes unpredictable.

(Apr 7, 2021 11:00 PM)Leigha Wrote: Following off and on the Chauvin trial, and last week, the prosecution did quite well and third degree murder seemed...possible. But they’re falling down this week and the defense is picking away at their case - I’m leaning so far, towards manslaughter. Chauvin didn’t render care when he should have and violated police procedures, allowing Floyd to die, if we are to believe Floyd died from a drug overdose/cardiac arrest (if that is how he died) Floyd could’ve very well died from a combination of excessive force in restraining him coupled with cardiac arrest. (or the stress of excessive force could have sped up cardiac arrest if someone has overdosed) Kind of hard to reasonably believe that Floyd would have died regardless if Chauvin had continued excessive force for over nine minutes - what are the odds? (Reasonable odds)

His fellow officers testified that protocol requires you to stop using excessive force once the suspect stops resisting. In this case too, he/they should have moved Floyd to his side to alleviate his breathing. Manslaughter is about negligence whereas third degree murder indicates possible depravity in someone’s mind (a defendant’s mind). Both show no “intent” to kill but both offer different causes, I guess. What a difference a week makes.

That said, Floyd’s autopsy report showed cause of death as homicide so not sure if that matters during a trial or as to how one comes to a verdict, considering it’s a piece of evidence like all evidence?

An acquittal seems unlikely because even if Chauvin didn’t intend to kill Floyd, he had many points throughout the arrest to diffuse the situation, alleviate breathing and basically, adhere to police protocol regarding excessive force. He just was completely negligent once Floyd was on the ground. So, an acquittal would be a head scratcher but juries are sometimes unpredictable.

It's cute when people make emotional judgements out of complete ignorance of the law.

Floyd had three times the lethal dose of fentanyl in his system. So saying "if that is how he died" is willfully ignoring the objective facts (affirmed by the medical examiner). Presuming you have a steady, uncritical diet of leftist media, I suppose we can't really expect any better. It's really awful the way they are setting up people to be surprised by the legally likely outcome (complete acquittal), no doubt providing them with more sensational news about the following riots. Chauvin would have been justified in using more force (taser, which would have likely exacerbated Floyd's heart condition), so he actually did deescalate (you know, the opposite of excessive force). He also had to keep Floyd restrained due to the volatility of the gathering crowd. Training dictates that you don't loosen control of a proven resistant subject when other people may need to be restrained by the other officers on the scene. People regularly use every excuse, ploy, and violence to avoid being arrested. Don't like it? Tell that to all the criminals who demonstrate it to police daily.

That restraint wasn't a choke, nor in any way cut off blood or air flow. That's not excessive force. The only stress Floyd was under is called excited delirium due to the drugs in his system. That alone likely could have contributed to cardiac arrest.

Chauvin's fellow officers also testified that they had, themselves, kept people similarly restrained until EMS arrived and that Floyd's previous resistance and the agitated crowd warranted the continued restraint.

Homicide in a medical report is not the same as homicide as a criminal charge. In a medical report, it just means that some action by another was involved, even if not causative of the death. IOW, it cannot be ruled out as a contributing factor based solely on the physical evidence that medical examiner finds. Other equally contributing factors listed were three times the lethal dose of fentanyl, a heart condition, and preexisting compromised breathing likely due to Covid.

Chauvin didn't deviate from police protocol. It's just that the prosecution has asked very limited questions that don't take into account the entire situation. If there wasn't an agitated crowd, he likely would have eased up on Floyd, but police do not relax their control of a situation while it still appears to be potentially volatile, as that's exactly how cops die.

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. (He was with Floyd right before the altercation with the police happened last year. It looked like Floyd was buying drugs from him right after he left the store where he was accused of passing a counterfeit bill.) If the shift of blame goes partially to him for Floyd’s death - that might cause a jury to acquit. Still leaves the negligence piece dangling though on the part of the cops to help preserve life, when someone is in their “care.” We shall see...