• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

The Derek Chauvin / George Floyd Trial

Page 38 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
HomerJS said:
2. What if some .... judge grants the appeal of the criminal case based on that juror seemingly being dishonest on the questionnaire. At least Chauvin will stay in jail. Who knows what a new trial can bring.
Click to expand...
That's the ONLY reason I can see for the Federal charges and I'm not sure I agree with them considering he's facing state charges for another, very similar case form years back.
 
s0me0nesmind1 said:
You think someone that improperly restrained someone that was being arrested - high on drugs - and trying to resist arrest multiple times is worth life behind bars?

Do you realize that doesn't at all line up with what you expect ACTUAL pre-meditated murderers to get, let alone the facts of this case?


Now were at the clear cut-off where we aren't looking for justice - we just want to do something because of mob rule. I sincerely hope Chauvin is released significantly early just to spite the overwhelming about of stupidity that you and the rest of the mob has been trying to instill.
Click to expand...

In this situation yes, because the facts support it. And your description of what happened is not what took place, and you know it.. It's time you stop with your lies. He was rightfully convicted by a jury of his peers per Minnesota laws, which the facts more than support.
 
Viper1j said:
It's the difference between assault, and aggravated assault.

www.cnn.com

Judge's ruling allows for longer sentence for Derek Chauvin in murder of George Floyd | CNN

The judge who oversaw Derek Chauvin's murder trial ruled Wednesday that there were four aggravating factors in the killing of George Floyd, a decision that allows the judge to give Chauvin a lengthier prison sentence.
www.cnn.com www.cnn.com

Judge's ruling allows for longer sentence for Derek Chauvin in murder of George Floyd
The judge who oversaw Derek Chauvin's murder trial ruled Wednesday that there were four aggravating factors in the killing of George Floyd, a decision that allows the judge to give Chauvin a lengthier prison sentence.

Chauvin, the 45-year-old former Minneapolis Police officer, was convicted of two counts of murder and one count of manslaughter last month for kneeling on the neck and back of Floyd, handcuffed and lying prone on the street, for 9 minutes and 29 seconds.

He could face up to 40 years in prison for second-degree murder, up to 25 years for third-degree murder and up to 10 years for manslaughter. Chauvin has no prior criminal record, so Minnesota's sentencing guidelines recommend about 12 and a half years in prison for each murder charge and about four years for the manslaughter charge.

In this case, state prosecutors asked for a tougher sentence than the recommendations provide, citing five aggravating factors they said applied. Chauvin's defense attorney, Eric Nelson, said those factors did not apply.

****

He won't get life. He'll be 85 when he gets out.

Judge Peter Cahill ruled Wednesday that four of the five factors were proven beyond a reasonable doubt. He found that (1) Chauvin abused a position of trust and authority, and (2) he treated Floyd with particular cruelty.

"The slow death of George Floyd occurring over approximately six minutes of his positional asphyxia was particularly cruel in that Mr. Floyd was begging for his life and obviously terrified by the knowledge that he was likely to die but during which the defendant objectively remained indifferent to Mr. Floyd's pleas," Cahill wrote.

Cahill also ruled that (3) children were present during the offense, and (4) Chauvin committed the crime as a group with the active participation of at least three other people.

On that fourth point, Judge Cahill wrote that three former officers -- Tou Thao, Thomas Lane and Alexander Kueng -- were actively involved in the incident, but he made no finding as to their intent or knowledge. They have each pleaded not guilty to charges of aiding and abetting.

However, Cahill rejected the aggravating factor that Floyd was "particularly vulnerable," noting Floyd had initially resisted arrest. He also ruled that restraining Floyd in the prone position did not create a vulnerability but was instead the actual mechanism of his death.
Chauvin waived his right for the jury to decide the aggravating factors, instead opting for Judge Cahill to do so. His sentencing is set for June 25, and he is currently being held at the Minnesota Correctional Facility-Oak Park Heights.

The sentences for all three crimes would likely be served at the same time, not consecutively. "Generally, when an offender is convicted of multiple current offenses... concurrent sentencing is presumptive," according to the guidelines.

Chauvin faces other legal issues as well. A federal grand jury indicted all four former officers in connection with Floyd's death, alleging they violated his constitutional rights, according to court documents filed in federal court in Minnesota. Chauvin also was charged in a separate indictment related to an incident in which he allegedly used unreasonable force on a Minneapolis 14-year-old in September 2017, the Justice Department said in a statement.
Click to expand...
I don't know if I fully agree with the bold, They had Floyd handcuffed and in the police car. They pulled him threw and on to the ground, when there was no reason to do so. So I kind of agree that he was in a vulnerable position because of them doing so. but that is just my limited opinion of what I saw, and not knowing the legal specifics behind it.
 
woolfe9998 said:
Per your own article, sentencing guidelines say 12.5 years for each murder, 4 years for manslaughter. The article also says the sentences will be served concurrently.





I stand by my prediction. He'll get 20-25 years and serve 15-18.
Click to expand...
It's possible that because he is a cop, they remove the chance of parole, making him serve the full sentence. Doubtful it would happen, but possible.
 
NWRMidnight said:
In this situation yes, because the facts support it. And your description of what happened is not what took place, and you know it.. It's time you stop with your lies. He was rightfully convicted by a jury of his peers per Minnesota laws, which the facts more than support.
Click to expand...

Show me on the doll where the facts hurt you?

Nothing I said there was incorrect or exaggerated.
 
NWRMidnight said:
what you said was 100% incorrect and exaggerated, as what you described is not what took place.. Facts don't hurt me, your lies hurt everyone.
Click to expand...

It's funny, you've made 4 posts - 2 directly to me - and you for whatever reason can't seem to accomplish grade-school level debate of citing what I said that was incorrect and showing why it's "incorrect" to you.

Sadly for you, facts don't care about your feelings.
 
s0me0nesmind1 said:
It's funny, you've made 4 posts - 2 directly to me - and you for whatever reason can't seem to accomplish grade-school level debate of citing what I said that was incorrect and showing why it's "incorrect" to you.

Sadly for you, facts don't care about your feelings.
Click to expand...

Why Cite something that is already known and in this very thread? But lets be clear, we aren't debating. You are lying, which is not debating a position. There is only one position when it comes to facts, and that position is the truth. But to clarify your lie, He is NOT spending time behind bars because he improperly restrained someone that was being arrested, high on drugs, or tried to resist arrest multiple times. Claiming that is why he IS spending time behind bar is 100% a lie. He is spending time behind bars because he murdered the man. Your whole argument has already been debated/argued in court, and your argument has been proven false, as you are more than aware of. So, you are not only lying, you are trolling. But please, keep making yourself look like a tool, trying to imply the facts hurt me somehow.. I'm not the one ignoring the facts and truth you idiot.
 
Last edited:
NWRMidnight said:
We aren't debating. You are lying, which is not debating. But to clarify your lie, He is not spending time behind bars because he improperly restrained someone that was being arrested, high on drugs, or tried to resist arrest multiple times. He is spending time behind bars because he murdered the man. Your whole argument has already been debated/argued in court, and your argument has been proven false. But please, keep making yourself look like a tool, trying to imply the facts hurt me somehow.. I'm not the one ignoring the facts and truth you idiot.
Click to expand...

Got it - so I didn't say statements of anything that was untrue or "lying" as you stated - you just have a beautiful narrative that you have created in your head of the events - and anything that deviates from it in the slightest is considered a lie in your inept tiny little brain.

You cited absolutely nothing from my post that was inaccurate or not true. You cited nothing that was a "correction" of my supposed "lies". You acted like a child as expected.

 
s0me0nesmind1 said:
Got it - so I didn't say statements of anything that was untrue or "lying" as you stated - you just have a beautiful narrative that you have created in your head of the events - and anything that deviates from it in the slightest is considered a lie in your inept tiny little brain.

You cited absolutely nothing from my post that was inaccurate or not true. You cited nothing that was a "correction" of my supposed "lies". You acted like a child as expected.

Click to expand...

Why is he spending time behind bars? it's not because he improperly restrained Floyd, it's not because Floyd was on drugs, it was not because Floyd resisted arrest. But thanks for the clip, and demonstrating to each of us how we fill every time you respond with your lies.
 
Last edited:
s0me0nesmind1 said:
Got it - so I didn't say statements of anything that was untrue or "lying" as you stated - you just have a beautiful narrative that you have created in your head of the events - and anything that deviates from it in the slightest is considered a lie in your inept tiny little brain.

You cited absolutely nothing from my post that was inaccurate or not true. You cited nothing that was a "correction" of my supposed "lies". You acted like a child as expected.
Click to expand...
So you're lying, again.
 
s0me0nesmind1 said:
Got it - so I didn't say statements of anything that was untrue or "lying" as you stated - you just have a beautiful narrative that you have created in your head of the events - and anything that deviates from it in the slightest is considered a lie in your inept tiny little brain.

You cited absolutely nothing from my post that was inaccurate or not true. You cited nothing that was a "correction" of my supposed "lies". You acted like a child as expected.

Click to expand...
Have you heard of "lying by omission"? What you said may have been part of the truth, but it most certainly did not tell the whole story, or even the most critical part of it.
 
s0me0nesmind1 said:
You think someone that improperly restrained someone that was being arrested - high on drugs - and trying to resist arrest multiple times is worth life behind bars?

Do you realize that doesn't at all line up with what you expect ACTUAL pre-meditated murderers to get, let alone the facts of this case?


Now were at the clear cut-off where we aren't looking for justice - we just want to do something because of mob rule. I sincerely hope Chauvin is released significantly early just to spite the overwhelming about of stupidity that you and the rest of the mob has been trying to instill.
Click to expand...
Members of the jury have already stated their decision was based on the evidence. You just want Chauvin found not guilty because he killed a black man. So I guess in your racist mind the jury must be lying because that is the way you think.

You want to forget the fact Floyd was already restrained and Chauvin held his knee on his neck until he killed him. By testimony in the trial everyone on the scene knew Chauvin was killing Floyd. The only people who seem to forget that are you and Chauvin.
 
Yes, he's being sentenced later today. Prosecution is requesting 30 years.

Defense is arguing for...probation? For murder?

I predict he gets 15-20.
 
Ouch, hard to watch Mom talking about for his son. 🙁
Hopefully incidents like the manner of death of George Floyd while being put in arrest won't happen again.
 
Oyeve said:
Shes an ass. Saying he is her favortite. What mother says that? No wonder hes a POS.
Click to expand...
I wonder how her other kids reacted to that. Of course he is a POS, he could have stopped after G.Floyd was already pinned in the grown and pleading. But he didn't.
Hoping for a long sentence.
 
And the sentence is 270 months. Less time (199 days) served. I think it could have been more, but I am not a judge.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top