The Trial of Derek Chauvin

[Pato del Muerto 52886]

18 minutes ago, Jkwellborn said:

You’re joking right? Have you ever sat through a first aid class? A lot of them tell you that a person isn’t choking if they can talk. It most likely stems from that.

Choking is different than what was happening. When you squeeze a balloon, it’s easy to deflate it and it’s harder to inflate it. That may not be exactly it either. The epiglottis is a one way valve I believe so if the knee caused that to cover the windpipe then he could still exhale until he had no breath, but not inhale. 

[Jkwellborn 6883]

Choking is different than what was happening. When you squeeze a balloon, it’s easy to deflate it and it’s harder to inflate it. That may not be exactly it either. The epiglottis is a one way valve I believe so if the knee caused that to cover the windpipe then he could still exhale until he had no breath, but not inhale. 

I get that. I was just trying to offer where people may have heard that and equated the two.

[Guest Lobo]

The pulmonologist indicated the "can talk, can breathe" thing is bullshit.  I don't remember if from my training.  If you do from yours, great.  I hope you're not a cop.  

Obviously the infant CPR thing was for levity.  I'm happy to hang back and listen your tales of proper certification in frontline work.  If that a directive or overarching element of your training, I'm in shock but I don't doubt it happened to you. 

Edited April 8, 2021 by Lobo

[kevwun 15943]

To me it's more proof that he wasn't resisting.  If you can rest on your knees on someone's back without losing your balance, it means they aren't moving around which means they aren't resisting.

[JBJ 3685]

33 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Choking is different than what was happening. When you squeeze a balloon, it’s easy to deflate it and it’s harder to inflate it. That may not be exactly it either. The epiglottis is a one way valve I believe so if the knee caused that to cover the windpipe then he could still exhale until he had no breath, but not inhale. 

His point was that your breathing can be incrementally becoming more distressed and you can still talk up to the point past which you can't.

"I can't breathe" can be a sign that someone is struggling to breathe, even though they must be actually breathing to say it.

[Brisketexan 105586]

30 minutes ago, JBJ said:

His point was that your breathing can be incrementally becoming more distressed and you can still talk up to the point past which you can't.

"I can't breathe" can be a sign that someone is struggling to breathe, even though they must be actually breathing to say it.

In that context, "I can't breathe" means "I'm rapidly losing my ability to bring in as much oxygen as I need."  You don't go from "got all the oxygen I need, thanks!" to "I have zero oxygen coming in!" in such situations of crushing and/or strangulation (as opposed to choking on a large obstruction -- swallow something that COMPLETELY blocks  your airway, and that may be the case.  Or, if you pull the ligature tight enough around my neck to COMPLETELY close my airway, maybe).  Significantly restricting the airway can kill you.  You don't have to close  it off entirely to asphyxiate someone.

But, millions of Americans believe that, and would acquit Chauvin, because that's what Fox News commentators have told them over, and over, and over -- "I can't breathe?  Bullshit, he was talking, he was fine!"

[Guest Lobo]

There are numerous, viable historical records of severed heads still blinking/talking/breathing/moving eyes for a few seconds after separation.  Does that mean those people were just fine if they were still talking?  Doctor Python wants to know! 

[SHOOTER12 8853]

In my ignorant opinion, defense is tripping over their weiner on cross examination of Dr. Smock

[Johnny Sack 8397]

State won today's round pretty handily.  Defense won yesterday, IMO.

[Jkwellborn 6883]

There are numerous, viable historical records of severed heads still blinking/talking/breathing/moving eyes for a few seconds after separation.  Does that mean those people were just fine if they were still talking?  Doctor Python wants to know! 

Chickens can still make racket after they lose their heads supposedly.

[GRHorn 105]

If your airway is partially compressed and ventilation of your lungs is impaired sufficiently for a long enough period you will get hypoxic. You could then go into cardiac arrest. You could also potentially be able to make some noise during the course of this happening. At least that’s what I can gather from my chiropractic training. 

[Guest Lobo]

When being compressed by a full grown person on your airways in the name of vengeance...perhaps one last gasping sound is possible.  Interesting things are possible in the last moment of true and horrific despair.  

It will be interesting to see Chauvin walk the Earth as its loneliest man.  Even his children won't know his face. 

[WhatTheBuck 28838]

1 hour ago, Jkwellborn said:

Chickens can still make racket after they lose their heads supposedly.

I don’t know about racket but they can run like hell. I’ve witnessed that firsthand. 

[Captainant 27979]

18 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

I don’t know about racket but they can run like hell. I’ve witnessed that firsthand. 

So you're saying you've watched chickens run themselves to death? Doesn't sound like the beheading REALLY did them any harm[/sack]

[Johnny Sack 8397]

1 hour ago, Lobo said:

When being compressed by a full grown person on your airways in the name of vengeance...perhaps one last gasping sound is possible.  Interesting things are possible in the last moment of true and horrific despair.  

It will be interesting to see Chauvin walk the Earth as its loneliest man.  Even his children won't know his face. 

140 pounds is full grown?  Chauvin is a wee little man. 

[Guest Lobo]

That description will come in handy on his "Cell-Block C" dating app.

[Johnny Sack 8397]

1 hour ago, Lobo said:

That description will come in handy on his "Cell-Block C" dating app.

You are still fascinated with jail rape.  Exactly how many cocks have you sucked?

[ChuckNorrisActionJeans 2687]

2 hours ago, Johnny Sack said:

140 pounds is full grown?  Chauvin is a wee little man. 

Yes a 140 pound person can be a grown adult. Perhaps dickhead felt the need to compensate for his size. I'd be overweight at 140...chew on that.

Now, because you disagree, how about you look up posts I've made starting from 2 years ago and neg every single one of them, like you did last time....you serious person, you. 

[Johnny Sack 8397]

13 minutes ago, ChuckNorrisActionJeans said:

Yes a 140 pound person can be a grown adult. Perhaps dickhead felt the need to compensate for his size. I'd be overweight at 140...chew on that.

Now, because you disagree, how about you look up posts I've made starting from 2 years ago and neg every single one of them, like you did last time....you serious person, you. 

So you’re a midget?

and any neg bombs I’ve ever done were in response to pussy drive by negs without comments made on me first.  So I’m guessing you’re one of those fagits, but I don’t care enough about you to check.  
 

I don’t otherwise neg.  

Edited April 9, 2021 by Johnny Sack

[Hmbre97 6333]

"Fagits"

Really? Are you a fucking 11 year old? I'm on tapa, can someone neg this dumbfuck for me? Make sure and leave a comment first though...

[GRHorn 105]

1 hour ago, Johnny Sack said:

You are still fascinated with jail rape.  Exactly how many cocks have you sucked?

He’s obsessed with jail rape and Q Anon

[NotActuallyALonghorn 4980]

I mean, I get the whole "if he can talk he can breathe" thing. I'm sure we've all seen the posters showing a person choking and how to do the heimlich maneuver. They show a person grabbing at their throat because a person who can't breath because they are choking can't talk to tell you they are choking and it is important to recognize the signs in order to intervene and save them. But I also recognize that choking is different than suppressing the ability of the lungs to to breathe adequately. I think the whole choking thing has been so ingrained in many people that they fail to see how someone could die from the effects of pulmonary distress otherwise. It doesn't make it right, and I'm not making an excuse, I'm just trying to offer an explanation. I would hope that our first responders would know better, since they kind of have a duty to know better.

[SHOOTER12 8853]

3 hours ago, Johnny Sack said:

140 pounds is full grown?  Chauvin is a wee little man. 

Truth, that really surprised me when I heard that and had to go online to research it further.  It's a bad combination when you mix narcissist/racist/small man syndrome into one person.

[Guest Lobo]

6 hours ago, Johnny Sack said:

You are still fascinated with jail rape.  Exactly how many cocks have you sucked?

That's very insensitive language.  It's a shame that the legacy of a legendary Texas family fell to such an average, average man.  

[Johnny Sack 8397]

3 hours ago, Lobo said:

That's very insensitive language.  It's a shame that the legacy of a legendary Texas family fell to such an average, average man.  

Don’t be ashamed.  I don’t care that you putt from the rough. 

[DonkeyCigars 143]

10 hours ago, ChuckNorrisActionJeans said:

Yes a 140 pound person can be a grown adult. Perhaps dickhead felt the need to compensate for his size. I'd be overweight at 140...chew on that.

Now, because you disagree, how about you look up posts I've made starting from 2 years ago and neg every single one of them, like you did last time....you serious person, you. 

Wow you are tiny. Don't care about the trial; let's drill down into this. How tall are you? What is your story? Are you a little person? What is your ancestry? 

Edited April 9, 2021 by DonkeyCigars

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

@Johnny Sack really wants to see this guy walk so he can call a bunch of black people thugs when they riot all over the country.

[DonkeyCigars 143]

Just now, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

@Johnny Sack really wants to see this guy walk so he can call a bunch of black people thugs when they riot all over the country.

It is curious how much attention, energy and time that's being spent on watching the proceedings and scorecarding it, as if it were a spectacle or a sport with a rooting interest.

I'd like to read a long form article about the whole thing when it's finished; no desire to see the sausage being made.

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

Just now, DonkeyCigars said:

It is curious how much attention, energy and time that's being spent on watching the proceedings and scorecarding it, as if it were a spectacle or a sport with a rooting interest.

I'd like to read a long form article about the whole thing when it's finished; no desire to see the sausage being made.

yeah i'm not following any of it. the outcome was already known. cop straight up murders a dude in broad daylight who was in cuffs laying on his stomach, a bunch of people filmed it while screaming 'you're going to kill him'. but he'll walk because there's a juror or two that aren't ever going to fault a cop for killing a black dude on drugs.

[DonkeyCigars 143]

2 minutes ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

but he'll walk because there's a juror or two that aren't ever going to fault a cop for killing a black dude on drugs.

Why already jump to this conclusion? It's like when talking to your children, don't you advocate and develop them so they eliminate negative self-talk? Why already catastrophize and create a hypothetical and treat it as a reality? It's an absence of hope, which I think is unhealthy and I've seen it a lot lately. 

There will be time enough to wring our hands and be upset and get mad/sad about the injustice yet. I just don't think "pre-gaming" is a good use of energy and emotion.

[Captainant 27979]

6 minutes ago, DonkeyCigars said:

Why already jump to this conclusion? It's like when talking to your children, don't you advocate and develop them so they eliminate negative self-talk? Why already catastrophize and create a hypothetical and treat it as a reality? It's an absence of hope, which I think is unhealthy and I've seen it a lot lately. 

There will be time enough to wring our hands and be upset and get mad/sad about the injustice yet. I just don't think "pre-gaming" is a good use of energy and emotion.

It's not "pregaming", it's anticipating the same outcome every time a cop murders someone under color of law. Not an absence of hope, it's an awareness of how this shit goes in the US. 

[DonkeyCigars 143]

6 minutes ago, Captainant said:

It's not "pregaming", it's anticipating the same outcome every time a cop murders someone under color of law. Not an absence of hope, it's an awareness of how this shit goes in the US. 

Fair enough. 

I guess with this take, you are essentially saying one of two things (if not both) are true:

1) The legal system is very flawed in that lawyers suck at doing their job and cannot expertly strike and pick jurors so that invariably there isn't one or two who "aren't ever going to fault a cop for killing a black dude on drugs."

or

2) The American population is such that it is an impossible task to probabilistically find 12 random people who don't possess the above bias and there will always be 1 or 2 out of 12 no matter who the lawyer is and how great a job they do in voir dire.

Edited April 9, 2021 by DonkeyCigars

[BabaYaga 15381]

13 hours ago, Johnny Sack said:

140 pounds is full grown?  Chauvin is a wee little man. 

Ever rolled with a high level female BJJ practitioner (rhetorical).  It's all about leverage, and they can make themselves "feel" like a 200lb man and tie you up in knots quickly.  It's all about position, and a knee focused over your center of gravity does just that (which is why it's taught)

[Brisketexan 105586]

2 minutes ago, DonkeyCigars said:

1) The legal system is very flawed in that lawyers suck at doing their job and cannot expertly strike and pick jurors so that invariably there isn't one or two who "aren't ever going to fault a cop for killing a black dude on drugs."

There's a reason that Tom didn't get a fair trial, and it wasn't because Atticus was a bad lawyer.  When a large enough percentage of the population carries an insurmountable prejudice on a position, then nothing else matters.

[Johnny Sack 8397]

7 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

There's a reason that Tom didn't get a fair trial, and it wasn't because Atticus was a bad lawyer.  When a large enough percentage of the population carries an insurmountable prejudice on a position, then nothing else matters.

There is at least as much concern Chauvin will not get a fair trial because the jurors and judge are scared shitless of what will happen to them or their community if they acquit or convict on a lesser charge.

Plenty of people in this thread apparently think we should not even bother with a trial.

[Captainant 27979]

3 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

Plenty of people in this thread apparently think we should not even bother with a trial.

Well Chauvin certainly felt that way about Floyd. Which is why this whole mess is happening.

Everyone deserves their day in court, even if they're a murderous piece of shit. 

[Brisketexan 105586]

2 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

There is at least as much concern Chauvin will not get a fair trial because the jurors and judge are scared shitless of what will happen to them or their community if they acquit or convict on a lesser charge.

Bullshit.  YOU have that concern.  Your preferred political commentators have that concern.  But history fucking shows us, over, and over, and over, and over, that cops on trial, the VAST majority of the time, get benefits of the doubt (based on inherent biases of a large percentage of our population) that you and I would never, ever come even close to getting.

I haven't seen anyone say "no trial."  In fact, that's the whole fucking point -- many of us are sick and tired of cops living completely above and outside the Rule of Law.  We want to see it applied.  What's on trial here is lawlessness.  Chauvin, like so many cops, puts himself above the law.  We want to see him subjected to it.

[DonkeyCigars 143]

28 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

There's a reason that Tom didn't get a fair trial, and it wasn't because Atticus was a bad lawyer.  When a large enough percentage of the population carries an insurmountable prejudice on a position, then nothing else matters.

So you are saying it's this: The American population is such that it is an impossible task to probabilistically find 12 random people who don't possess the above bias and there will always be 1 or 2 out of 12 no matter who the lawyer is and how great a job they do in voir dire.

[GopherRock 1772]

Another question: what is defense counsel waiting for? I understand not cross-examining the 9-year-old kid, but IMHO he needed to really be on the offensive yesterday. The Hennepin County Medical Examiner will be up later today, and if he's saving all his attacks for him, it's too little too late.

The reason all of us are talking about this is that we're all tired of lawmen deciding that misdemeanors are punishable by summary execution.

[gsoda3 3304]

16 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I haven't seen anyone say "no trial."  In fact, that's the whole fucking point -- many of us are sick and tired of cops living completely above and outside the Rule of Law.  We want to see it applied.  What's on trial here is lawlessness.  Chauvin, like so many cops, puts himself above the law.  We want to see him subjected to it.

i doubt johnny disagrees there.  his point is lawlessness and misapplied justice can swing both ways.  

[Brisketexan 105586]

11 minutes ago, DonkeyCigars said:

So you are saying it's this: The American population is such that it is an impossible task to probabilistically find 12 random people who don't possess the above bias and there will always be 1 or 2 out of 12 no matter who the lawyer is and how great a job they do in voir dire.

ALWAYS?  No.  There's variation in communities, luck of the draw on a jury pool, etc.  And it's gotten better - used to be, no matter how well you did in voir dire, odds are 8-9 jurors would think that way.  Now, it's more like 1-3.  But it only takes 1 for a mistrial.

6 minutes ago, gsoda3 said:

i doubt johnny disagrees there.  his point is lawlessness and misapplied justice can swing both ways.  

CAN it?  Sure.  But let's be real fucking clear here -- the ratio of cops getting off because they're heroes in blue protecting us from bad guys vs. cops being held to the exact same legal standards as everyone else is staggeringly in the cops' favor.  Shit, when you factor in the percentage of cases in which charges aren't even brought against the cops, the ratio requires a calculator with space for a lotta zeros.

[gsoda3 3304]

9 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

CAN it?  Sure.  But let's be real fucking clear here -- the ratio of cops getting off because they're heroes in blue protecting us from bad guys vs. cops being held to the exact same legal standards as everyone else is staggeringly in the cops' favor.  Shit, when you factor in the percentage of cases in which charges aren't even brought against the cops, the ratio requires a calculator with space for a lotta zeros.

sure, i don't think anyone's arguing that though.  

[hayden_horn 11365]

seems like some of yall think it's george floyd that's on trial here.

he never got a trial because he suffocated to death facedown on pavement with a cop's knee on his neck while he was restrained in handcuffs.

[Brisketexan 105586]

6 minutes ago, gsoda3 said:

sure, i don't think anyone's arguing that though.  

That's exactly what Johnny argued - that the cop isn't going to get a fair shake.

[gsoda3 3304]

31 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

CAN it?  Sure.  But let's be real fucking clear here -- the ratio of cops getting off because they're heroes in blue protecting us from bad guys vs. cops being held to the exact same legal standards as everyone else is staggeringly in the cops' favor.  Shit, when you factor in the percentage of cases in which charges aren't even brought against the cops, the ratio requires a calculator with space for a lotta zeros.

 

what you're saying here is different from what johnny's saying.  both are integral aspects of our justice system.  this is holding officers accountable to a standard they should be, but rarely are, held.  in an ideal world (which this isn't) there should be no deferential treatment or bias.  

 

 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Johnny Sack said:

There is at least as much concern Chauvin will not get a fair trial because the jurors and judge are scared shitless of what will happen to them or their community if they acquit or convict on a lesser charge.

Plenty of people in this thread apparently think we should not even bother with a trial.

this is hoping our process is impartial enough to give the accused a fair trial.

[Brisketexan 105586]

Just now, gsoda3 said:

 

what you're saying here is different from what johnny's saying.  both are integral aspects of our justice system.  this is holding officers accountable to a standard they should be, but rarely are, held.  in an ideal world (which this isn't) there should be no deferential treatment or bias.  

 

 

 

 

 

this is hoping our process is impartial enough to give the accused a fair trial.

It's not impartial enough.

History indicates that our process and national jury pool do NOT give cops a fair trial -- they almost always give them an extra benefit of the doubt.  In spite of that.....Johnny has zero concerns about that, the thing that happens over, and over, and over.  Nope.  NOW, he's worried about the cop getting a fair trial.

How about the cop just be subjected to the same risks and rewards of the system that the rest of us face?  That's what the cops absolutely do not want.

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

55 minutes ago, gsoda3 said:

i doubt johnny disagrees there.  his point is lawlessness and misapplied justice can swing both ways.  

can you or @Johnny Sack show your work here? could you share all the examples of cops being wrongfully convicted of crimes because the jurors were scared shitless of what would happen to them?

[gsoda3 3304]

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

How about the cop just be subjected to the same risks and rewards of the system that the rest of us face?  That's what the cops absolutely do not want.

that's what should happen.  and again, no one's arguing differently.  your point and johnny's point aren't mutually exclusive although you're trying to make it that way. 

 

[Guest Lobo]

While I got a B+ in Criminal Procedure, I'll continue to defer to the legal experts on here...but it seems to me that the defense is taking a page out of 2020 and going for the second broadest and whackiest coincidence possible.  

George Floyd was suffering from a heart condition and had drugs in his system.  And he just so happened to have a heart attack at the exact moment he was being choked out by a police officer.  What are the odds?  

[JBJ 3685]

1 hour ago, hayden_horn said:

seems like some of yall think it's george floyd that's on trial here.

he never got a trial because he suffocated to death facedown on pavement with a cop's knee on his neck while he was restrained in handcuffs.

 

5 minutes ago, Lobo said:

While I got a B+ in Criminal Procedure, I'll continue to defer to the legal experts on here...but it seems to me that the defense is taking a page out of 2020 and going for the second broadest and whackiest coincidence possible.  

George Floyd was suffering from a heart condition and had drugs in his system.  And he just so happened to have a heart attack at the exact moment he was being choked out by a police officer.  What are the odds?  

What the fuck are you two talking about?

I swear people read something on Twitter/FB/make up shit in their minds and respond to it here.