BROKEN NEWS: Derek Chauvin was pronounced guilty of everything to the surprise of no one and delight of many. We can't say what the verdict should have been (not being as omniscient as TV's talking heads), but we personally would have had a huge problem saying that there wasn't at least reasonable doubt about Floyd's death being partially or primarily caused by his drug use and underlying health conditions. Not to mention his propensity for screwing around on the wrong side of the law and resisting arrest.
But apart from that, we have to ask this question: did Derek Chauvin actually get a fair trial and fair consideration by the jury? And the answer is certainly "no."
Jurors were aware of the explosive nature of this case and were not sequestered to keep them from knowing the mob sentiments. They had to be aware that they and their family members would be in physical peril if Chauvin was exonerated or even convicted of "too small" an offense.
But now let's imagine that these were 12 of the bravest jurors ever. People who could somehow put personal risk aside. They would still have to make this choice in the jury room: is it better to destroy one man who may or may not be guilty, or unleash fresh Hell on American cities? More billions in damage. More people injured and killed.
Even if they believed Chauvin to be completely blameless, they would themselves have been subsequently guilty of third-degree murder ("perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others without regard to human life") in the event anyone died in the entirely predictable furies unleashed by a "not guilty" verdict.
Whether you agree or disagree with the verdict, it's undeniable that Derek Chauvin did not and could not get a fair trial. Which should be an affront to all who claim to value actual justice.
=============
Readers- We'd already written the rest of today's blog before the verdict was announced, under the assumption that a jury would need more time if they were actually weighing evidence instead of emotion. Sometimes we're stupid that way.
But apart from that, we have to ask this question: did Derek Chauvin actually get a fair trial and fair consideration by the jury? And the answer is certainly "no."
Jurors were aware of the explosive nature of this case and were not sequestered to keep them from knowing the mob sentiments. They had to be aware that they and their family members would be in physical peril if Chauvin was exonerated or even convicted of "too small" an offense.
But now let's imagine that these were 12 of the bravest jurors ever. People who could somehow put personal risk aside. They would still have to make this choice in the jury room: is it better to destroy one man who may or may not be guilty, or unleash fresh Hell on American cities? More billions in damage. More people injured and killed.
Even if they believed Chauvin to be completely blameless, they would themselves have been subsequently guilty of third-degree murder ("perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others without regard to human life") in the event anyone died in the entirely predictable furies unleashed by a "not guilty" verdict.
Whether you agree or disagree with the verdict, it's undeniable that Derek Chauvin did not and could not get a fair trial. Which should be an affront to all who claim to value actual justice.
=============
Readers- We'd already written the rest of today's blog before the verdict was announced, under the assumption that a jury would need more time if they were actually weighing evidence instead of emotion. Sometimes we're stupid that way.
We're writing this post before any jury verdict has been handed down in the Derek Chauvin trial, so it may already be out of date by the time you read it. But that doesn't change the fact that Joe Biden really shouldn't be out there telling the world that he's praying for a guilty verdict, even if the jury is sequestered.
He further specified that he thinks the evidence for conviction is "overwhelming," which sets up an unfortunate dynamic: if the jury finds Chauvin "not guilty," then the president of the United States is already on record as opining that it wasn't a fair trial and the outcome was rigged. In other words, street violence and mayhem will be an entirely understandable (and perhaps laudable) response because Mister "No Malarkey" said so.
And as long as we're writing about things that haven't happened yet, let's think about an unintended consequence we'll see if there is a "guilty" verdict against Chauvin...
And for equal time, let's consider what we're likely to see if Chauvin is acquitted...
46 comments:
See? Violence (or the threat of it) works! It gets the left exactly what they want.
Has Floyd been canonized yet? I’m sure that miracles attributed to him have and will happen.
Well Pig Pelosi said that he sacrificed his life for the cause!
I guess we can put “It’s better to let 100 guilty men free than keep one innocent man in jail” to rest now.
I can't help but wonder, though...
It's an inevitability that the conviction will be overturned on appeal. The presiding judge as much as said so.
So, smoke and mirrors, anyone?
My prediction of bloody civil war by year's end stands.
I thought it strange that the judge would announce, in open court, that Mad Maxine's comments are grounds for an appeal.
Heard a theory yesterday that Waters and Bidens comments are intended to bring about an appeal to keep fanning the flames.
I don't recognize this place anymore.
Don't worry. Chauvin will commit suicide in prison while the surveillance cameras and guards are unaccountably absent.
If I was a cop in modern day USA I would just tun away from any encounter with a black perp. Let 'em all carry on and see how things pan out.
As regards Biden's pathetic comments - didn't he learn it all at His Master's knee?
Stilt - your drug dealer one is fantastic! Yeah, I was opining to Magoo way before the verdict that there was NO WAY he was getting off. Lady Justice is shaking her blindfolded head
I am glad that we moved from the bay area to Appalachia 30+ years ago. We can hunker down with our bang sticks and liquid refreshment. Ahhhhhh, the good life. And, I am betting on a mistrial based on the 'remarks' of mad max and Buck Fiden.
Would really like to post this to FB, but I am a gutless wonder. The fact that the president had to give his opinion just makes this case an irredeemable mess. And you are quite right, that jury knew what the outcome of an innocent verdict would have been. Their names were easy to find--just like their addresses and families. Sad, sad, disgustingly sad.
I was surprised to see Craig of Farrington in the comic.
Love Craig.
Hate what's going on all around us...
"Guilty" was a foregone conclusion; the only surprise was that that anyone doubted the result at all.
There is a strong message here - Don't be a cop in a liberal city. Was the level of force used beyond what was necessary? Perhaps, but likely not if the perp hadn't consumed three times a normally lethal dose of narcotics, with a heart condition and a tumor. Perhaps the cops in liberal cities should have a list of co-morbidities to ask the perps about before they attempt to arrest them. They should certainly be aware that ANYTHING they do will be recorded. Cops in liberal cities will certainly be thrown under the bus if they make the tiniest misjudgement while trying to arrest a belligerent suspect. So unless the perp is actually engaging in assault or worse, just leave them alone. Liberals don't mind petty crimes (unless it is happening to them) so ignore them.
Chris Rock has some good advice for those to wish to commit crimes in respectful cities: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uj0mtxXEGE8.
Otherwise, if you are a cop in a liberal city - leave. (Same advice for residents who don't want to live in a war zone. Liberal cities are dangerous.)
Corrupted election system, corrupted judiciary system, corrupted political system. Large part of the population willing to surrender their rights and freedom for the illusion of safety or momentary convenience. Mobocracy in many parts of the country. What can go wrong? Who knows what the flashpoint will be, or where, but it's coming. When you hear, as happened under the last year of Jimmy Carter, "America is ungovernable", we go to the next phase.
It's official. We now have a three tiered "Justice System".
1) Government officials and billionaires
2) Members of a protected racial group
3) Deplorables
Kafka, Orwell and Rand have now become oracles.
I was a prosecutor for twenty years, and in my professional opinion the evidence in the Chauvin case if accepted in the light most favorable to the state's case, supported a verdict of manslaughter at best. The jury delivered a OJ sized miscarriage of justice.
Agreed, the verdict fix was in before the trial ever started.
It should now be legal precedent that patriotic legal American citizens can break any law they choose with impunity. After all, that which is permitted the blacks should be permitted the rest of humanity.
Personally, had I been on the jury there would have been at least one NOT guilty vote that would not have changed under any circumstances.
re: Biden comments
All Biden comments come from Obama via Susan Rice. It's a perfect situation for Obama,
a third term and let senile old Joe take the heat. Biden has no clue what he's saying.
" Violence (or the threat of it) works! It gets the left exactly what they want."
Isn't that the very definition of "terrorism"?
And with his statement about "the correct verdict" yesterday, Biden has surpassed Barry's "I don't have all the facts, but that cop was an idiot" statement.
I still can't understand how Chauvin was convicted at least 3 ways for killing a guy who was already dying. Negligence I can see, but not actual murder. Of course, I never understood the knee on the neck thing either; wasn't Floyd already handcuffed? If so, then a zip tie around his ankles would have stopped him from going anywhere. And why no charges for the several other cops on the scene who did not intercede to stop Chauvin?
I hope the verdicts are overturned somehow, but if not, I hope the very instant Trump is sworn in again, he turns and points his finger an aide who is prepared and waiting to issue an on-the-spot presidential pardon. And to set up a GoFundMe account that will vastly compensate that sacrificed pawn for the horrors of his unwarranted punishment.
@John the Econ- Yes, violence works and is now officially endorsed by the Oval Office. Our nightmare has only just started.
@HankJ- It's funny you mention being canonized. All morning I've been thinking about Floyd and the violent BLM mobs as "Saint George and the Dragoons." That may yet become the title of a post here.
@Savannah Sue- Is it too late for Nancy to wash his feet?
@Bobo the Hobo- I don't honestly know if Chauvin was innocent, though he certainly wasn't guilty of all the charges. I just know he didn't get a fair trial and, indeed, there may not be such a thing as a "fair" trial for anyone now when race is involved (or can be made to look involved).
@M. Mitchell Marmel- Oh, there's all kinds of Hell coming. The only thing this verdict might have changed is the timing. If Chauvin was acquitted, we'd all be choking on the smoke of burning cities today. But since he was convicted, all that previous violence has now been "justified" and Biden's pronouncement of "systemic racism" will be used to further ramp up the violence.
@Jim Irre- I don't know that I buy the idea that Waters and Biden are sly enough to deliberately gin up an appeal. I think they're both idiots and social pyromaniacs.
@Brie Camembert- Chauvin is definitely a marked man. But unlike Epstein, he might be of more value to the powerful alive than dead.
@YHS- I think we all knew what the verdict would be, and the fact that the jury decided so quickly only confirmed it.
@Fred Ciampi- I'm betting on a mistrial, too.
@Nancy Dickerson- I posed my mini-editorial to Facebook and haven't been banned yet. I think I'm too far under their radar to attract attention. And yes, this whole mess was and is disgusting.
I've read this story before.
But one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said to them, “You know nothing at all! You do not understand that it is better for you to have one man die for the people than to have the whole nation destroyed.”
John 11:49-50 (NRSV)
I don't intend to say that Chauvin is a modern-day Christ, but there are a whole lot of people around who have taken Caiaphas' advice to heart. I'm really getting tired waiting for that asteroid people were worrying about to get here and write "fine" to this farce.
The briefness of the "deliberations" after a weeks' long trial, the finding of guilty on all three counts, screams this was not a just verdict. I wish I could have been in that room to hear the conversation. Such as, if we don't convict him, they'll come after us. Let's just twiddle our thumbs for a few hours to make it look good. I'm not invested in the life of Derek Chauvin, but I am appalled at the erosion of our justice system to achieve social and, more importantly, political gains, both the antithesis of freedom. This country is speeding off the cliff and there will be a tipping point. I just hope payback will not be just to the people trying to ruin our country.
If there was anything indisputable from this trial, it was that George Floyd was going to die in the foreseeable future from the consequences of multiple, mostly self-inflicted causes. It was just Derek Chauvin's misfortune to be the straw that broke the camel's back on that fateful day.
Would you want to be on that jury? Would any sane person who was not somehow invested in a "guilty" verdict want to be on that jury?
Especially considering that certain high profile members of Congress were literally threatening you?
Fortunately for Chauvin, Maxine Waters served up grounds for an appeal:
"I'll give you that Congresswoman Waters may have given you something on appeal that may result in this whole trial being overturned," Judge Peter Cahill told defense attorney Eric Nelson on Monday.
The real question needs to be, where will we find quality people to be police officers from this point going forward? What sane person will want a job where half the population wants you dead, you're mostly confronting drug addicted sociopaths who have been conditioned with a sense of political invincibility and self-righteousness, and your cowardly employers (city councils) will gladly toss you to the wolves the second anything controversial happens? No thanks.
But above all, this is probably what I find most disgusting about this whole affair:
The canonization of George Floyd. The most gracious thing that can be said about George Floyd was that his life was a mess. A more objective assessment would be that he was a thug. The kind of thug that would invade people's homes, point guns at them and then rob them.
The popular narrative is that after being released from prison, Floyd moved to Minneapolis to start over. But judging from his toxicology report that wasn't working out all that well.
My point is that 99.99% of these people who today say they care so much about George Floyd and worship his martyrdom would not have given him the time of day had they come across him on the street before May 25th, 2020. When perhaps George really needed them. Like with most of Progressivism and all virtue signalling, people are only willing to "care" in hindsight, and as long as it doesn't really cost them anything.
@MsPony- I don't know Craig of Farrington! The images are ones I got from Clipart.com (a service I use a lot).
@Snark- Good points, all.
@Anonymous- I'd like to disagree with you. I don't.
@TrickyRicky- Great observation about Kafka, Orwell and Rand. The new Trinity?
@Kent Neal- Great to get your perspective! "Manslaughter" was my guesstimate of what might be a justifiable verdict. But it wouldn't have satisfied the dangerous mobs.
@American Cowboy- To know for sure I wouldn't have voted guilty, I would have had to heard 100% of the evidence given at trial - and I definitely didn't. But my inclination is to think I couldn't have supported conviction on the harshest charges.
@Roger Myers- I completely agree. Joe gave up thinking for himself (voluntarily or not) ages ago.
@rickn8or- Yep.
@Drew458- I believe that charges/trials are pending for the other officers involved. And I, too, am a bit confused about how one man can be convicted of three different charges specifically addressing the killing of one person.
@Alej- I'm pretty sure that yesterday's verdict shouldn't be considered final; there will be appeals for years (assuming that Chauvin survives prison).
@Confusingly Clear- I'm hoping that the upcoming meteor shower brings a big "surprise" with it.
@Shelly- Well said!
@John the Econ- The canonization of George Floyd is disgusting. His death may have been unfair, but it was certainly related to a lot of bad choices on his part. Great points and links - thank you!
My countenance is now that of a perpetually pissed off curmudgeon. The real tears I cry are for mine and your grandchildren. In my memory, we were a shining city on a hill. Now, we are a rolling shitstorm 7 feet deep. Good bye short lived republic. We didn't appreciate you enough.
I need somebody to explain to me how you can be charged with and convicted of three different levels of homicide when there's only one gd corpse.
I would have declined jury duty if only because I have a distaste for pig's heads and pig's blood being spattered on my house. Due Process and the Rule of Law is now a grim joke, and in the case of Floyd's verdict, I don't relish the thought of hundreds of BLM communists attacking my home. These vermin don't really care about verdicts; they don't care about anything that the ordinary hard-working, taxpaying, patriotic Americans care about. The vermin will loot, burn and bury anyone or any business that happens to be in the way---or not in the way; makes no difference.
I don't fear these feral animals---at least from the standpoint that I would not hesitate to protect my property and the lives of my wife and me via armed resistance. What I do fear is that the law and the MSM would paint these animals as victims and me as the villain.....thereby "punishing" me by forcing us into bankruptcy from having to use up life savings to pay defense lawyers.
Derick Chauvin could not have received a fair trial in the US. The jury knew full well what the results of a "not guilty" verdict would have been. That being said, Chauvin was a rogue cop and had been involved in many disciplinary actions in the past. The City of Minneapolis could have saved the entire county untold trauma by firing his ass long ago.
The one thing missing, and glaringly so, from this whole mess and the cries of "systemic racism" is the absolute silence from the left and the African American community and there so called Prophetess such as Jeremiah Rice, Al Sharpton, Jessie Jackson and at the very top of the list, the Obama's themselves demanding the end of the gangster mentality in their youth, demanding that their babies quit having babies, demanding that the fathers of these babies participate in the upbringing of theses babies, demanding and educating their youth to simply do what the police ask you to do, DEMANDING that the left quit paying lip service to improving the educational opportunities for inner city youth.
Where is this in the national conversation?
What,
no Lutherans joke?
@Velveeta, I must respond to your question. The reason they found him guilty on all three charges is because if the mob in the streets, armed and ready, heard "Not Guilty" twice, that would be their ticket to violence. Which actually proves the jury was driven by mob violence rather than true deliberations. And this is borne out by the idiots like AOC stating the guilty verdict was not enough. The goal posts just keep on moving.
@JohntheEcon
"Would any sane person who was not somehow invested in a "guilty" verdict want to be on that jury?"
That is why I believe these 'jurors' wanted to get on the jury.
They had no fear of the mob because they agreed with the mob and knew that a guilty plea was what they would deliver.
So Gropey Joe gets to make a comment on a trial and there are NO repercussions. Richard Nixon was severely chastised for a comment about Charles Manson, and that comment helped Manson live about 40 years longer than he should have. Oh, how I LOATHE the Demo_Rats!!
So now that they have their guilty verdict, does that mean they won't riot anymore?
.
LOLOLOLOOLOL
.
The jurors were scared sh*tless that they would assume the same temperature as Floyd if they didn't vote to convict.
.
NSF
I believe this is the most poignant comment of all. A Twitter post from a Matt Walsh.
"A few years ago, George Floyd forced his way into a woman's home and robbed her at gunpoint. Today, that woman has to watch as millions turn her victimizer into their messiah. We are a sick country"
It happened so quickly, and yet it's been building for decades now: We are now effectively living under mob rule. In addition to that, we are all now to be judged politically just like when the Bolsheviks took over Russia. Why else have all of America's biggest corporations suddenly gone woke?
If we were indeed living under the threat of the phony "white supremacy uprising" the left keeps warning us about, this never would have happened. Chauvin never would have been found guilty, if he had even been tried at all. It's the complete opposite. The woke mob took control of the country last year. It's just that nobody dares admit it, even to themselves. They own the streets of our urban centers. They politically own the corporations. They even own the President of the country, and most of the other branches of government. They now feel free to do whatever they want. Whatever trials take place from this point on will be nothing more than show trials.
@DougM, there's nothing funny about Lutherans anymore since they went woke.
@Fish Out of Water said, Matt Walsh was right on. We are sick. We have been for quite some time.
Even if they believed Chauvin to be completely blameless, they would themselves have been subsequently guilty of third-degree murder ("perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others without regard to human life") in the event anyone died in the entirely predictable furies unleashed by a "not guilty" verdict.
I had to read that three times to make sure you actually stated that!
Mr. Jarlsberg, I cannot believe you said that. What twisted logic possessed you to write that?
Justice is Justice, period. Those that would throw tantrums and spread death and destruction if they did NOT get the verdict they wanted are NOT to be taken into account - just rule/decide on the facts, man... Period. Dot.
As for the Jurors being guilty of third-degree murder if they ruled per the facts? To put it mildly, "Thy Logic is in Abeyance!". No. They. Wouldn't. Keep thinking this sort of logic, you get more of the same - once you pay the Danegeld, you never get rid of the Dane.
I'm not particularly pleased with you in regards to that statement. Normally you are better than that. I'm taking you to task on that, sorry.
Otherwise, you're an okay guy!
Igor
@John the Econ: Recently I wonder if there are some parallels to what is happening here and what happened in Imperial Russia prior to the travesty/tragedy of the Bolshevik Revolution. That is does the inability, the lack of resolve, the ineffectual responses that kept Imperial Russia from effectively dealing with what would become mortal threats to its existence, exist in this country now?
I don't think there's any doubt that the jury was adversely influenced by the violence around there, such as the witness for the defense that had his former residence splattered with pig blood and shelled with pig head artillery. I do have one question here...in all these 'mostly peaceful' demonstrations, the signs held up that say 'No Justice No Peace' seems to me to be extortion, which is a crime in itself. Their idea of 'justice' is the verdict they want, regardless of the facts of the case. If they don't get their way, they will Burn, Loot and Murder. That's the message. Well extortion isn't about money. It's about causing fear in order to achieve an end result. Hence, all those signs, legally speaking, are committing the crime of extortion. Yet, no one anywhere mentions that. I wonder why.
I don't think there's any doubt that the jury was adversely influenced by the violence around there, such as the witness for the defense that had his former residence splattered with pig blood and shelled with pig head artillery. I do have one question here...in all these 'mostly peaceful' demonstrations, the signs held up that say 'No Justice No Peace' seems to me to be extortion, which is a crime in itself. Their idea of 'justice' is the verdict they want, regardless of the facts of the case. If they don't get their way, they will Burn, Loot and Murder. That's the message. Well extortion isn't about money. It's about causing fear in order to achieve an end result. Hence, all those signs, legally speaking, are committing the crime of extortion. Yet, no one anywhere mentions that. I wonder why.
@Fish Out of Water, we certainly do have the institutional corruption that existed in Imperial Russia and lead to its weakening and eventual fall. I wonder if the corruptocrats within that regime somehow thought they'd survive just as our deep state operatives believe that they'll remain immune to a similar fate.
@Unknown, I think that for most people "No Justice No Peace" is just another lightweight slogan, although I do agree with you that uttering such a thing should be considered a sign of intent. (Just as if some idiot were to point an unloaded gun at me and I assume that it is indeed loaded and act accordingly)
I live in a liberal arts college town in an otherwise very red state. Every so often college kids will assemble on the main bridge out of downtown to protest this or that, and one one particular day there were about a half-dozen exclusively white giggling girls at the usual spot waving No Justice, No Peace signs. I was very tempted to stop and ask, "Or exactly what? If something doesn't happen the way you think it should are you too going to rampage through downtown, loot, burn, destroy, or even murder? What price are you willing to pay for 'Justice'?"
Probably just as well that I didn't, as I'm pretty sure all I'd get in return would have been blank stares. I really don't think most of these people think all that hard about any of this. They're the true children of "privilege" we keep hearing about, the privilege being that they'll never be held accountable for any of their childishness.
Unfortunately, last summer we found out that we do have a sizable number of people who are willing to take the next step, although I argue that most of them largely do so because they expect little to no lasting consequences for doing so. And as long as that is the case, their numbers will grow.
@John: What is needed is a "Comité Pour Encourager Les Autres"...
If just one or two privileged brats get their damfool brains blown out and die at each and every "peaceful protest", I think the rest will eventually get the message that it ain't cute, it ain't smart and it most certainly ain't funny...
"... Hence, all those signs, legally speaking, are committing the crime of extortion. Yet, no one anywhere mentions that. I wonder why." ~~ Unknown
Borrowing a line from Animal House, "If you mention extortion to me again, I'll have your legs broken."
It was explained that Minn. has no manslaughter law. That is why he was charged
with the lesser murder charge.
Typically, the Amazon Error Code 9074 issue arises when watching Amazon Prime Video content on a Roku system. There are also other factors that contribute to the issue. Here are a few options for resolving the Amazon Error Code 9074 problem. So, in order to address this problem, you must follow all of the instructions given in this article. We hope the information in this article has helped you resolve the Amazon Error Code 9074 issue so you can continue to enjoy your streaming.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Amazon Klantenservice Nummer.
"unleash fresh Hell on American cities?"
Is it too late to vote for this one? After all, the vast majority of the damage occurs in cities run by non-reality based unicorn believers.
Post a Comment