GRcade

Prototype wrote:Yeah I get that, but there’s nothing unintentional about that.

Murder is murder. In Scotland you establish the intention to kill someone and combine that with establishing that their actions resulted in the death of that same person.

If he decided to just do it in the moment, it may not be pre-meditated with any length of time, but he still decided to kill and for me that’s intentional.

I kind of agree with this although I think there are some circumstances where murder isn't premeditated, the classic is coming home and finding your wife in bed with another woman and flying into a rage.

The problem is court cases seem to be based too much around the mind of the individual at the time the crime took place, which is unknowable.

Prototype wrote:the classic is coming home and finding your wife in bed with another woman

not sure murder would be the first thing on my mind here?

Prototype wrote:

Prototype wrote:the classic is coming home and finding your wife in bed with another woman

not sure murder would be the first thing on my mind here?

Lex-Man wrote:

Prototype wrote:Yeah I get that, but there’s nothing unintentional about that.

Murder is murder. In Scotland you establish the intention to kill someone and combine that with establishing that their actions resulted in the death of that same person.

If he decided to just do it in the moment, it may not be pre-meditated with any length of time, but he still decided to kill and for me that’s intentional.

I kind of agree with this although I think there are some circumstances where murder isn't premeditated, the classic is coming home and finding your wife in bed with another woman and flying into a rage.

The problem is court cases seem to be based too much around the mind of the individual at the time the crime took place, which is unknowable.

I think in some ways the degree charges for murder are good, but it really just creates a legal industry for endless appeals. I absolutely agree that he should get second degree murder, it seems the most appropriate charge. It obviously wasn't pre-meditated, but there is certainly evidence to suggest at the time Floyd was put on the floor, the intent was to choke the life out of him. I'm not sure how it could be viewed otherwise. I don't know a reasonable human being that would think holding someone down for that length of time wouldn't cause significant harm.

I'm guessing in the UK, we would only have the choice to try for murder or manslaughter. And then probably end up with a misconduct in public office conviction.

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/04/19/poli ... index.html

Jesus strawberry floating Christ. An elected rep calling for a guilty verdict which may give the court reason to overturn.

What a strawberry floating idiot.

Prototype wrote:

Prototype wrote:the classic is coming home and finding your wife in bed with another woman

not sure murder would be the first thing on my mind here?

Yeah, I'd murder a sandwich

Prototype wrote:https://edition.cnn.com/2021/04/19/politics/maxine-waters-derek-chauvin-blm/index.html

Jesus strawberry floating Christ. An elected rep calling for a guilty verdict which may give the court reason to overturn.

What a strawberry floating idiot.

Defending herself to theGrio in an interview, Waters said, "I am nonviolent. Republicans will jump on any word, any line and try to make it fit their message and their cause for denouncing us and denying us."

That is not a defence or what she said at all

Tomous wrote:

Prototype wrote:https://edition.cnn.com/2021/04/19/politics/maxine-waters-derek-chauvin-blm/index.html

Jesus strawberry floating Christ. An elected rep calling for a guilty verdict which may give the court reason to overturn.

What a strawberry floating idiot.

Defending herself to theGrio in an interview, Waters said, "I am nonviolent. Republicans will jump on any word, any line and try to make it fit their message and their cause for denouncing us and denying us."

That is not a defence or what she said at all

Are you speaking to me or to the quote?

Prototype wrote:

Tomous wrote:

Prototype wrote:https://edition.cnn.com/2021/04/19/politics/maxine-waters-derek-chauvin-blm/index.html

Jesus strawberry floating Christ. An elected rep calling for a guilty verdict which may give the court reason to overturn.

What a strawberry floating idiot.

Defending herself to theGrio in an interview, Waters said, "I am nonviolent. Republicans will jump on any word, any line and try to make it fit their message and their cause for denouncing us and denying us."

That is not a defence or what she said at all

Are you speaking to me or to the quote?

The quote.

The longer the jury deliberates the less likely Chauvin is getting convicted.

Memento Mori wrote:The longer the jury deliberates the less likely Chauvin is getting convicted.

I find it baffling. I know they are supposed to review the case but its literally on video. It shouldn't take as long as an hour to come to a conclusion.

captain red dog wrote:

Memento Mori wrote:The longer the jury deliberates the less likely Chauvin is getting convicted.

I find it baffling. I know they are supposed to review the case but its literally on video. It shouldn't take as long as an hour to come to a conclusion.

I saw a poll recently where only something like 45% of Republicans thought Chauvin should be found guilty.

Memento Mori wrote:

captain red dog wrote:

Memento Mori wrote:The longer the jury deliberates the less likely Chauvin is getting convicted.

I find it baffling. I know they are supposed to review the case but its literally on video. It shouldn't take as long as an hour to come to a conclusion.

I saw a poll recently where only something like 45% of Republicans thought Chauvin should be found guilty.

As sad as it sounds, that's more than I would expect! I'd like to see a poll of Trump supporters, I bet that would be a much lower number.

captain red dog wrote:

Memento Mori wrote:

captain red dog wrote:

Memento Mori wrote:The longer the jury deliberates the less likely Chauvin is getting convicted.

I find it baffling. I know they are supposed to review the case but its literally on video. It shouldn't take as long as an hour to come to a conclusion.

I saw a poll recently where only something like 45% of Republicans thought Chauvin should be found guilty.

As sad as it sounds, that's more than I would expect! I'd like to see a poll of Trump supporters, I bet that would be a much lower number.

0% is a lower number than 45% correct.

captain red dog wrote:

Memento Mori wrote:The longer the jury deliberates the less likely Chauvin is getting convicted.

I find it baffling. I know they are supposed to review the case but its literally on video. It shouldn't take as long as an hour to come to a conclusion.

From my experience of jury service there is always one know it all twat who thinks they know better and wants to go against the grain.

Neo Cortex wrote:

captain red dog wrote:

Memento Mori wrote:The longer the jury deliberates the less likely Chauvin is getting convicted.

I find it baffling. I know they are supposed to review the case but its literally on video. It shouldn't take as long as an hour to come to a conclusion.

From my experience of jury service there is always one know it all twat who thinks they know better and wants to go against the grain.

That's no way to talk about Henry Fonda!

Edit - actually in reading about the man, carry on.

A verdict has been reached. This bodes well.

Apparently it's unanimous as well.

Watching the youtunbe link in the OP and so many people are saying gooseberry fool like 'BURN IN HELL' and 'He was dangerous, the cop did the right thing'.

He may have been a bad guy, I don't know, but a cop killing him is not the answer, not at all.

The guy is going down.