Cortopassi wrote: ↑Thu Apr 22, 2021 1:17 pm
I still haven't heard any convincing argument that Chauvin was not guilty, regardless of the how the trial proceeded and whether it was a foregone conclusion. Is there anyone here who really thinks he was not the immediate direct cause of Floyd's death?
In a criminal trial, the burden of proof is on the prosecution, not the defense.
Acquittal does not require convincing the jury that the defendant is not guilty. It requires convincing the jury that the defendant
may not be guilty. Big difference.
Cortopassi wrote: ↑Thu Apr 22, 2021 1:17 pm
I go back to it was over 8 minutes. I believe they said Floyd said I Can't Breathe 27 times before he lost consciousness?
I hear you. I saw the video, too, and it was hard to watch. I remember that my initial thoughts were, "Why did that cop keep his knee on the guy's neck for several minutes after he stopped moving or making any noise? How can that possibly be justified as necessary? Is he sadistic or sociopathic or something?"
But then details about the incident started to trickle out in the ensuing weeks and months, and the plot thickened.
Floyd had fentanyl in his system -- supposedly a lot of it -- and fentanyl is known to be dangerous for often making people stop breathing if they take too much of it. I seem to recall one toxicology report showed that Floyd had enough fentanyl in his system to kill three men. (Fact-check?)
I also heard about a few other interesting pieces of evidence that were presented in the trial, but to me the fentanyl in Floyd's system was the one that places the biggest question mark over the question of whether Floyd would still be alive if it hadn't been for Chauvin's actions.
I have no way of gauging the probabilities involved, but if it's true that Floyd had enough fentanyl in his system to kill at least one man, I have a really hard time not acknowledging that as reasonable doubt that Chauvin murdered Floyd. And in a criminal trial, reasonable doubt means you're supposed to acquit.