Derek Chauvin files for new trial after murder conviction in George Floyd case

[Beetlegeuse]

Like Ray Charles couldn't see this coming.

Judge Cahill clandestinely went Pontius Pilate on this case. He deliberately fucked the dog -- beginning (but not ending) with refusing to grant change of venue -- then washed his hands of it in the belief that this would appease the Black LIES Matter and Anti-Trump Fascist terrorists and so immunize him against their wrath, knowing all the while that his happy horseshit would never withstand appeal.

But when Officer Gavin is exonerated on appeal, it won't be Cahill's ox that gets gored ... except for when Chauvin counter-files for malicious prosecution.

Derek Chauvin files for new trial after murder conviction in George Floyd case.

Former Minneapolis police Officer Derek Chauvin filed a motion for a new trial Tuesday after he was convicted last month of murdering George Floyd.

Chauvin’s attorney, Eric Nelson, is alleging pretrial publicity affected Chauvin's right to a fair trial.

The motion alleges the court abused its discretion by denying the requests for a change in venue and a new trial.

Because the court failed to sequester the jurors or "admonish them to avoid all media," Nelson's filing said, they were subjected not only to prejudicial publicity but also to "jury intimidation or potential fear of retribution."..


... Nelson's filing also accuses Minnesota state prosecutors of committing "pervasive, prejudicial prosecutorial misconduct" that also affected Chauvin's right to receive a fair trial.

The filing also requested an order “to impeach the verdict” on “the grounds that the jury committed misconduct, felt threatened or intimidated, felt race-based pressure during the proceedings, and/or failed to adhere to instructions during deliberations.”...

[Hughinn]

Several citizens begged to be released from jury duty during the selection process.

Most said openly they feared for thier lives and livelyhoods and couldn't be objective.

The democrat party and their militias threatened violence and destruction if they didn't get the verdict they wanted. After an entire summer of watching them burn, loot , beat and murder while democrat leadership insulated them from the law and consequences ,it was obvious they meant it.

Democrat leaders did the same thing a hundred years ago when they'd preach to thier militia at the time (wearing white hoods and carrying burning crosses) on courthouse steps making threats to get the verdict they wanted.

The objective is the same. To spread hatred, fear and chaos, promoting suffering and loathing. Then they present"solutions" which always entail giving them more power and control

[flyinlow]

Like Ray Charles couldn't see this coming.

Judge Cahill clandestinely went Pontius Pilate on this case. He deliberately fucked the dog -- beginning (but not ending) with refusing to grant change of venue -- then washed his hands of it in the belief that this would appease the Black LIES Matter and Anti-Trump Fascist terrorists and so immunize him against their wrath, knowing all the while that his happy horseshit would never withstand appeal.

But when Officer Gavin is exonerated on appeal, it won't be Cahill's ox that gets gored ... except for when Chauvin counter-files for malicious prosecution.

Derek Chauvin files for new trial after murder conviction in George Floyd case.

Former Minneapolis police Officer Derek Chauvin filed a motion for a new trial Tuesday after he was convicted last month of murdering George Floyd.

Chauvin’s attorney, Eric Nelson, is alleging pretrial publicity affected Chauvin's right to a fair trial.

The motion alleges the court abused its discretion by denying the requests for a change in venue and a new trial.

Because the court failed to sequester the jurors or "admonish them to avoid all media," Nelson's filing said, they were subjected not only to prejudicial publicity but also to "jury intimidation or potential fear of retribution."..


... Nelson's filing also accuses Minnesota state prosecutors of committing "pervasive, prejudicial prosecutorial misconduct" that also affected Chauvin's right to receive a fair trial.

The filing also requested an order “to impeach the verdict” on “the grounds that the jury committed misconduct, felt threatened or intimidated, felt race-based pressure during the proceedings, and/or failed to adhere to instructions during deliberations.”...

I seen the video of LEO Chauvin kneeling on a mans head just hours after it happened. I knew this was going to get bad so I started watching live streams that same night of the riots.

If you care to do some research look into the guy with an umbrella that had a gas mask. He’s on video striking the windows out of the Auto Zone retail store. This is what got the ball rolling with the looting and burning. A young black man approached the man who had the umbrella asking why break the windows. The man with a gas mask and umbrella replies “I am a civilian”. Only a cop would say that. Civilians don’t call themselves civilians.

The verdict of Officer Chauvin needs to be severe simply bc of the collateral damage he has caused. I do think there was an inside plot to brew up the riots in the beginning (man with umbrella & mask). Being an LEO requires a certain type of person. Kneeling on someone’s neck isn’t IMO required to subdue. Especially if you subsequently get a city burned down bc of it.

[wango]

Tough trial agreed. Almost a lose, lose whatever happens.

The reason the cops that beat Rodney got off was because they changed the venue. Should they have gotten off, yep. But the repercussions and long term effects of that verdict still contribute to today’s climate.

Have stated from the beginning - the shit storm that was created because this happened SO publicly & on video was enough to lock this dude away.

[warchild]

Def wasn’t a fair trial. A jury member that is blm…cmon man. The media convicted the officer hours after that incident happened with fentanyl Floyd. Any of you don’t agree then run a call on an erratic 6’4 male on drugs esp meth and tell me you would’ve made a different decision. Don’t matter the color of the guy but the media made it out to be a race issue.

[Beetlegeuse]

This trial was fucked up worse than OJ's.

May 15, 2021

Floyd Defendant Accuses State of 'Prosecutorial Misconduct'

By Jack Cashill

Tou Thao, one of the four Minneapolis police officers charged in the “murder” of George Floyd, filed a motion on Wednesday accusing the State of Minnesota of “prosecutorial misconduct stemming from witness coercion.” If Thao’s accusations are true, and they certainly seem to be, the State has allowed this trial to drift irredeemably far into the brave new world of mob rule.

The charges center on the testimony of Dr. Andrew Baker, the Hennepin County Medical Examiner. Baker conducted an autopsy on Floyd on May 26, 2020, the day after Floyd’s death. As yet unaware of the politics of the case, Baker reported his findings honestly, namely that “[t]he autopsy revealed no physical evidence suggesting that Mr. Floyd died of asphyxiation. Mr. Floyd did not exhibit signs of petechiae, damage to his airways or thyroid, brain bleeding, bone injuries, or internal bruising.”

Three days later, the State filed its initial complaint against Derek Chauvin. According to the complaint, quoted by Thao, “The full report of the ME is pending but the ME has made the preliminary findings. The autopsy revealed no physical findings that support a diagnosis of traumatic asphyxia or strangulation.”

It appears that prosecutors came quickly to the realization that without a charge of asphyxia, they could not accuse Chauvin of Murder-2nd Degree. As of May 29, he had been charged only with Murder-3rd Degree and Manslaughter-2nd Degree, and neither of those charges would have satisfied the largely peaceful protestors busily burning down America

Enter Dr. Roger Mitchell, stage left. A former Medical Examiner of Washington D.C. and current chair of the pathology department at Howard University College of Medicine, Mitchell spoke with Dr. Baker before Baker finalized his findings on June 1. Unsatisfied with the conversation, “Mitchell decided he was going to release an op-ed critical of Dr. Baker’s findings in the Washington Post.”

According to Thao’s motion, Mitchell called Baker to give him a heads up on the Post article and warned him, “You don’t want to be the medical examiner who tells everyone they didn’t see what they saw,” adding that “neck compression has to be in the diagnosis.”

Following the two conversations, Baker issued a press release containing the final autopsy that now listed “neck compression” among the findings. On November 5, 2020, state prosecutors met with Mitchell but have not shared the audio of that meeting, if one exists, with Thao’s defense team, Robert and Natalie Paule.

In the Chauvin trial, defense witness Dr. David Fowler, former chief medical examiner for the State of Maryland, ably refuted the asphyxia diagnosis. He argued that Floyd had likely died of a sudden cardiac event.

The physician with whom I have been consulting, Dr. John Dunn, a former chairman of the medico-legal committee for the American College of Emergency Physicians, has come to a similar conclusion. "Asphyxiation was not the cause of George Floyd's death," he argues. "It was cardiac arrhythmia during an episode of excited delirium, a well-known cause of sudden death.”

Eight days after Fowler’s testimony, Mitchell wrote an open letter to, among others, Brian Frosh, the Attorney General for the State of Maryland, calling for an “immediate investigation into the practices of the physician as well as the practice of the Maryland State Office of the Chief Medical Examiner (OCME) while under his leadership.” Fowler had served 17 years in that position. Less than 24 hours after seeing the letter, Frosh launched a review.

According to Thao’s motion, “The State… knew that a potential expert witness had coerced the State’s main expert witness/the only expert to perform the physical autopsy in the case of State v. Thao. The State did nothing in response to this coercion. Instead, the State knowingly allowed Dr. Baker to take the stand in State v. Chauvin and testified to coerced statements.” (emphasis added)

Again, according to Thao’s motion, “Dr. Mitchell’s conduct meets the elements to be found guilty of committing the crime of coercion.” Thao argues that Mitchell used the threat of a Washington Post op-ed to coerce Baker into modifying his opinion. Once Baker obliged him, Mitchell did not follow through on the op-ed.

If that were not mischief enough, the Thao motion continues, “Mitchell unlawfully injured Dr. Fowler’s trade by penning an open letter which resulted in an investigation into every death report in Maryland during Dr. Fowler’s tenure.”

As to how Mitchell’s interference affects Thao and the other police defendants, Thao’s point is inarguable: “Dr. Mitchell’s accusations and spurring of legal fallacies creates a chilling effect for Mr. Thao and violates his due process rights in that it has become extraordinarily difficult to find medical experts who are willing to state that Mr. Floyd’s death was undetermined in fear of their professional reputation and licensure.”

Given what has happened to Fowler -- let alone to Barry Brodd, the defense’s use-of-force expert whose former home was smeared with pig’s blood following his testimony -- Thao’s team will have an extraordinarily hard time recruiting any expert witnesses.

A day after Thao filed his motion, Judge Peter Cahill pushed back his trial and that of his colleagues from its August 23, 2021, scheduled date to March 22. The stated reason was to allow the federal civil rights case against the four to take precedence. Who knows what the real reason was?

What is most disturbing for those who have been paying attention is that too many conservative commentators and Republican politicians have watched this unfold in silence. What will it take, one wonders, to get their attention?

[wango]

I rolled my eyes (as did many of my friends in the profession) after reading the autopsy report. I can’t believe he wasn’t told by many individuals in the profession that the report looked suspicious.

Once again, all of the cardiac issues would be totally consistent with the restraint Floyd was placed in, that’s not “news” by any means.

I really don’t have any interest if he goes free or not. Actually, let him go so he can live out his days looking back over his shoulder. He doesn’t have O.J’s (Mr. If the glove don’t fit, you must acquit) charisma, fame or wealth to give him a snowballs chance in hell of a happy & successful life. Plus no further waste of tax dollars needs to be spent on this guy, the public has already paid enough.

[Hughinn]

It was essential at the time the narrative "racist white cop, kills unarmed black man" was exploited to create hatred, unrest and chaos. Destabilizing the structure and interrupting the prosperity we were having was paramount in orchestrating the regime change the powers that be desired.

If that narrative was exposed for the lie it was too early, then the political benefit the democrat party needed from the event itself would be reduced or disappear entirely. (The theater of democrats marching with protesters and taking selfies)

They obviously bought, bullied and intimidated anybody they had to in order to propagate that narrative and get the prescribed responses they needed from the courts as well as the general public. They started a fire, fanned the flames, then turned thier terrorist dogs loose on the public.

Chauvin had to hang, or the narrative and the lie would be exposed. The fact that the verdict is likely to not hold up will be irrelevant as time passes. The propaganda networks of the DNC will simply bury or spin it accordingly to the current political climate and the needs of the democrat party. Other crises and narratives will emerge to bury it soon. The case no longer has any political value.

Blue pill people will simply see Chauvin winning an appeal as evidence of some kind of bizarre undefined or explainable notion like "systemic racism" or some other horseshit word soup and harden their resolve to destroy America as it is. No news networks will openly dare to review the events and point out the careful orchestration and manipulation that took place within our institutions to get the original conviction. Nor will the lies told ever be exposed openly on any platform bigger than a few individuals discussing it.

It ain't the first time. And it won't be the last. Not as long as the democrat party weilds massive power and influence.

[wango]

He should have had a better lawyer or better yet, legal team. Perhaps consulted these officer’s lawyers?

[wango]

This guy was innocent too, again better legal representation. You got to pay for better lawyers when you f-up. Or of course complain that it was all “fixed” after you lose . . . .

The Juice puts on the gloves at 1:30.

[Hughinn]

This guy was innocent too, again better legal representation. You got to pay for better lawyers when you f-up. Or of course complain that it was all “fixed” after you lose . . . .

The Juice puts on the gloves at 1:30.

Of course the true travesty is that you're openly pointing out that ones ability to "pay" for justice through being able to "afford" the "right" legal representation was essentially his downfall in the case of Mr Chauvin as opposed to Mr Simpson, who got away with the brutal murder of two people.

In other words, Chauvin was a poor white cop, and not a rich liberal. So he couldn't "afford" justice. Therefore in reality, he deserves what he got. Because of what he is.

Sadly, I believe you're right for the most part, notwithstanding the idea that he deserved it simply for being a poor white cop. But that his financial status and current political climate dictated his fate more than the facts of the case. Same with Mr Simpson

And that is the true travesty of the situation. Not just in these cases, but in our justice system and society in general.

[wango]

Of course the true travesty is that you're openly admitting that ones ability to "pay" for justice through being able to "afford" the "right" legal representation was essentially his downfall in the case of Mr Chauvin as opposed to Mr Simpson, who got away with the brutal murder of two people.

In other words, Chauvin was a poor white cop, and not a rich liberal. So he couldn't "afford" justice. Therefore in your mind, he deserves what he got.

Sadly, I believe you're right for the most part, notwithstanding the idea that he deserved it simply for being a poor white cop. But that his financial status and current political climate dictated his fate more than the facts of the case. Same with Mr Simpson

And that is the true travesty of the situation.

You happened to leave out the other half of my two posts. The one where “the poor white cops” got off.

Well for Derrick, if he had so many supporters and so many convinced that he wasn’t going to get a fair shake, you think someone could have helped aid/fund his defense. Perhaps they knew too that is was hopeless as he was as guilty as stated and no one could make an argument otherwise. In other words, why flush more $ down the toilet because of this guys ridiculous actions.

As stated prior, by all means let him free. For fun, let’s start a pool as to just how long he lasts on the streets.

[Hughinn]

You happened to leave out the other half of my two posts. The one where “the poor white cops” got off.

Well for Derrick, if he had so many supporters and so many convinced that he wasn’t going to get a fair shake, you think someone could have helped aid/fund his defense. Perhaps they knew too that is was hopeless as he was as guilty as stated and no one could make an argument otherwise. In other words, why flush more $ down the toilet because of this guys ridiculous actions.

As stated prior, by all means let him free. For fun, let’s start a pool as to just how long he lasts on the streets.

No point in starting a pool.

That would be pretending that a poor white cop would get the same legal representation as a rich liberal in a court of law.

We all know that's not going to happen.

One is celebrated for murdering two people intentionally and maliciously, the other is hated for doing a thankless job and unintentionally causing a an unfortunate casualty.

Thier crimes, and the punishment or justice served or not served had more to do with political climate and desires of the powers that rule, than justice itself or fairness in judgment.

[wango]

No point in starting a pool.

That would be pretending that a poor white cop would get the same legal representation as a rich liberal in a court of law.

We all know that's not going to happen.

One is celebrated for murdering two people intentionally and maliciously, the other is hated for doing a thankless job and unintentionally causing a an unfortunate casualty.

Thier crimes, and the punishment or justice served or not served had more to do with political climate and desires of the powers that rule, than justice itself or fairness in judgment.

But again, you left out the fact that the cops that beat Rodney got off. My point was that maybe he needed better representation, but most felt it was a lost cause, but not with the cops in the Rodney case.

If I’m not mistaken, at the time OJ wasn’t really about being liberal. He was about money and money out here as it is many places is red and blue. Yeah and nobody is celebrating Derrick for his “unfortunate casualty”? Really, nobody?

You can’t make up the ludicrousness of some of the stuff happening lately. I truly understand where you are coming from and not trying to disrespect that in any way. Maybe you will see things differently when you get into your 60’s. It would be nice posting with you then just to see, but I’ll likely be dead, lol.

[Hughinn]

But again, you left out the fact that the cops that beat Rodney got off. My point was that maybe he needed better representation, but most felt it was a lost cause, but not with the cops in the Rodney case.

If I’m not mistaken, at the time OJ wasn’t really about being liberal. He was about money and money out here as it is many places is red and blue. Yeah and nobody is celebrating Derrick for his “unfortunate casualty”? Really, nobody?

You can’t make up the ludicrousness of some of the stuff happening lately. I truly understand where you are coming from and not trying to disrespect that in any way. Maybe you will see things differently when you get into your 60’s. It would be nice posting with you then just to see, but I’ll likely be dead, lol.

I don't take any disrespect from anything you say to me wango. I know you're a true student of knowledge and a teacher of what you learn. Like me, you've got more questions than answers. And every one answer seems to yield 3 questions. So we just go on. Some things I'm sure of. Others not so much.

In truth my perspective has changed over time. But the basic tenets have not.

I wish I had you as a teacher in my youth.

I think we could've enjoyed the time together.

[wango]

I don't take any disrespect from anything you say to me wango. I know you're a true student of knowledge and a teacher of what you learn. Like me, you've got more questions than answers. And every one answer seems to yield 3 questions. So we just go on. Some things I'm sure of. Others not so much.

In truth my perspective has changed over time. But the basic tenets have not.

I wish I had you as a teacher in my youth.

I think we could've enjoyed the time together.

Thanks Hughinn.

What’s cool is when I learn from my students (not referring to you as a student, not the intent. Just that you always can learn from anyone at any time, if your mind is open). They will say something that gives me a “holy-f**K” moment. Like, how the hell did you come up with that at 16 or 17?

I’m hoping that we are enjoying the here and now. I’m trying to more and more lately. Glad to have you here.

10 days left in the working world, I’ve put in my time.