Derek Chauvin trial megathread (SENTENCED TO 22.5 YEARS IN PRISON)

[Lief 🗽]

Why are editorial cartoonists always so far up their own asses?

The only good living American political cartoonist is Ward Sutton aka "Stan Kelly."

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Why are editorial cartoonists always so far up their own asses?

They think everyone will be drawn to their viewpoint.

[Joseph Cao]

Why are editorial cartoonists always so far up their own asses?

The non-memey answer is that editorial cartoonists have been forced towards becoming a market just like basically every other institution in politics, an effect that only gets stronger with the increasing consolidation of the media market and sidelining of local papers and local editorial cartoonists. The consumers in this particular political market are even more heavily partisan today. Editorial cartooning, by general design, is supposed to cater toward people to educate them about the political scene, but a useful shortcut nowadays is to simply act as the artistic version of common talking points of the sort that eventually end up on MSNBC or FOX. A cartoonist whose name has slipped my mind brought this point up more eloquently than I could: editorial cartoons as we knew them have mostly been supplanted by memes as a medium for artistic expression of political lampoons, so cartoons have gradually evolved toward the same kind of thinking that drives modern meme culture.

(Steve Sack is not a partisan Democrat or DNC shill by any means but the Chauvin trial is high-profile enough that you can fully expect him and his fellow left-leaning cartoonists to put out very similar sentiments. The heada**ery on display here is a product of their political environment more than anything else, which is pretty ironic considering the innate subversion of the history of political cartooning.)

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

The heada**ery on display here is a product of their political environment more than anything else, which is pretty ironic considering the innate subversion of the history of political cartooning.)

I suppose you can correctly say it is in line with the history of political cartooning though...

[Joseph Cao]

The heada**ery on display here is a product of their political environment more than anything else, which is pretty ironic considering the innate subversion of the history of political cartooning.)

I suppose you can correctly say it is in line with the history of political cartooning though...
(Also: are you thinking of Ben Garrison?)

From what I unfortunately know of Ben Garrison he would be very unlikely to delve into the history and modern direction of political cartooning, so if you're referring to the anonymous cartoonist then it isn't him I was thinking of. Ben is very much a poster child for the cartoonist's slide into aping internet memes (in the modern sense), however.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

The heada**ery on display here is a product of their political environment more than anything else, which is pretty ironic considering the innate subversion of the history of political cartooning.)

I suppose you can correctly say it is in line with the history of political cartooning though...
(Also: are you thinking of Ben Garrison?)

From what I unfortunately know of Ben Garrison he would be very unlikely to delve into the history and modern direction of political cartooning, so if you're referring to the anonymous cartoonist then it isn't him I was thinking of. Ben is very much a poster child for the cartoonist's slide into aping internet memes (in the modern sense), however.

Yeah I realized after typing that out Ben G is not the type of cartoonist that would do such a thing.

[Interlocutor is just not there yet]

It's a damn cartoon.

[Fuzzy Says: "Abolish NPR!"]

It's a damn cartoon.

It's a cartoon with a message that implies that a verdict should be about something other than proving a defendant guilty or innocent beyond a reasonable doubt.  ALL Lives Matter.  ALL Lives Matter EQUALLY.  That's God's view on it.  No, I will not pretend otherwise.

The trial was not about whether or not Black Lives Mattered or not; it was about whether or not Derek Chauvin's actions caused George Floyd's death, and whether or not those actions rose to the level of the crimes he was charged with.  Trials should not be about anything else, period.  

What this trial has is the look of a coerced verdict.  This, of course, does not mean that Chauvin was not guilty, and I am certainly not saying that.  But it is indisputable that the threat of massive violent demonstrations would occur in the event of an unsatisfactory verdict; this threat was never disputed and never downplayed by the media, and there was little reason to believe that this threat would be met with enough resistance to preempt significant damage.  What will happen if, indeed, Derek Chauvin's case IS reversed on appeal, even in part where the most severe charges are thrown out?  

How would YOU feel if it were YOU, or a loved one on trial, and the actions of others caused you to believe that the jury would be at risk for their own well-being, or the well-being of their city, if they returned a factual verdict that was not what a mob threatening violence wanted?  There is no place in a free, open, and honest society for a jury to have to think of the consequences if their proper verdict will be received with violence.  It may well be that in this case, the jury's verdict squared with the facts, but do appearances not matter here?  What happens to actual "justice" when the specter of mob violence is a factor at every significant jury trial?

Appearances matter in criminal justice.  What confidence can anyone have in a Criminal Justice system when the verdicts of juries have the appearance of being influenced by the coercive attempts of mobs?  Once that becomes a norm, there will never be such a thing as closure.  I would pray that those people who are sincerely liberal (in the true sense of the word) will stop enabling those elements in our society that seek not actual justice, but vengeance through coercion.

[South Dakota Democrat]

It's a damn cartoon.

It's a cartoon with a message that implies that a verdict should be about something other than proving a defendant guilty or innocent beyond a reasonable doubt.  ALL Lives Matter.  ALL Lives Matter EQUALLY.  That's God's view on it.  No, I will not pretend otherwise.

The trial was not about whether or not Black Lives Mattered or not; it was about whether or not Derek Chauvin's actions caused George Floyd's death, and whether or not those actions rose to the level of the crimes he was charged with.  Trials should not be about anything else, period.  

What this trial has is the look of a coerced verdict.  This, of course, does not mean that Chauvin was not guilty, and I am certainly not saying that.  But it is indisputable that the threat of massive violent demonstrations would occur in the event of an unsatisfactory verdict; this threat was never disputed and never downplayed by the media, and there was little reason to believe that this threat would be met with enough resistance to preempt significant damage.  What will happen if, indeed, Derek Chauvin's case IS reversed on appeal, even in part where the most severe charges are thrown out?  

How would YOU feel if it were YOU, or a loved one on trial, and the actions of others caused you to believe that the jury would be at risk for their own well-being, or the well-being of their city, if they returned a factual verdict that was not what a mob threatening violence wanted?  There is no place in a free, open, and honest society for a jury to have to think of the consequences if their proper verdict will be received with violence.  It may well be that in this case, the jury's verdict squared with the facts, but do appearances not matter here?  What happens to actual "justice" when the specter of mob violence is a factor at every significant jury trial?

Appearances matter in criminal justice.  What confidence can anyone have in a Criminal Justice system when the verdicts of juries have the appearance of being influenced by the coercive attempts of mobs?  Once that becomes a norm, there will never be such a thing as closure.  I would pray that those people who are sincerely liberal (in the true sense of the word) will stop enabling those elements in our society that seek not actual justice, but vengeance through coercion.

You're really not very smart, are you?  Black Lives Matter is in no way saying that black lives matter more than other lives.  It's a statement that black lives so often do not seem to matter, and they should matter equally to other lives.  If you don't understand that, no one can help you.

[ProudModerate2]

It's a damn cartoon.

It's a cartoon with a message that implies that a verdict should be about something other than proving a defendant guilty or innocent beyond a reasonable doubt.  ALL Lives Matter.  ALL Lives Matter EQUALLY.  That's God's view on it.  No, I will not pretend otherwise.

The trial was not about whether or not Black Lives Mattered or not; it was about whether or not Derek Chauvin's actions caused George Floyd's death, and whether or not those actions rose to the level of the crimes he was charged with.  Trials should not be about anything else, period.  

What this trial has is the look of a coerced verdict.  This, of course, does not mean that Chauvin was not guilty, and I am certainly not saying that.  But it is indisputable that the threat of massive violent demonstrations would occur in the event of an unsatisfactory verdict; this threat was never disputed and never downplayed by the media, and there was little reason to believe that this threat would be met with enough resistance to preempt significant damage.  What will happen if, indeed, Derek Chauvin's case IS reversed on appeal, even in part where the most severe charges are thrown out?  

How would YOU feel if it were YOU, or a loved one on trial, and the actions of others caused you to believe that the jury would be at risk for their own well-being, or the well-being of their city, if they returned a factual verdict that was not what a mob threatening violence wanted?  There is no place in a free, open, and honest society for a jury to have to think of the consequences if their proper verdict will be received with violence.  It may well be that in this case, the jury's verdict squared with the facts, but do appearances not matter here?  What happens to actual "justice" when the specter of mob violence is a factor at every significant jury trial?

Appearances matter in criminal justice.  What confidence can anyone have in a Criminal Justice system when the verdicts of juries have the appearance of being influenced by the coercive attempts of mobs?  Once that becomes a norm, there will never be such a thing as closure.  I would pray that those people who are sincerely liberal (in the true sense of the word) will stop enabling those elements in our society that seek not actual justice, but vengeance through coercion.

You're really not very smart, are you?  Black Lives Matter is in no way saying that black lives matter more than other lives.  It's a statement that black lives so often do not seem to matter, and they should matter equally to other lives.  If you don't understand that, no one can help you.

He never ceases to amaze me (in the most negative way possible).
Every chance he gets, he needs to degrade the BLM movement, and in essence dog-on black citizens through-out our nation.

[Fuzzy Says: "Abolish NPR!"]

It's a damn cartoon.

It's a cartoon with a message that implies that a verdict should be about something other than proving a defendant guilty or innocent beyond a reasonable doubt.  ALL Lives Matter.  ALL Lives Matter EQUALLY.  That's God's view on it.  No, I will not pretend otherwise.

The trial was not about whether or not Black Lives Mattered or not; it was about whether or not Derek Chauvin's actions caused George Floyd's death, and whether or not those actions rose to the level of the crimes he was charged with.  Trials should not be about anything else, period.  

What this trial has is the look of a coerced verdict.  This, of course, does not mean that Chauvin was not guilty, and I am certainly not saying that.  But it is indisputable that the threat of massive violent demonstrations would occur in the event of an unsatisfactory verdict; this threat was never disputed and never downplayed by the media, and there was little reason to believe that this threat would be met with enough resistance to preempt significant damage.  What will happen if, indeed, Derek Chauvin's case IS reversed on appeal, even in part where the most severe charges are thrown out?  

How would YOU feel if it were YOU, or a loved one on trial, and the actions of others caused you to believe that the jury would be at risk for their own well-being, or the well-being of their city, if they returned a factual verdict that was not what a mob threatening violence wanted?  There is no place in a free, open, and honest society for a jury to have to think of the consequences if their proper verdict will be received with violence.  It may well be that in this case, the jury's verdict squared with the facts, but do appearances not matter here?  What happens to actual "justice" when the specter of mob violence is a factor at every significant jury trial?

Appearances matter in criminal justice.  What confidence can anyone have in a Criminal Justice system when the verdicts of juries have the appearance of being influenced by the coercive attempts of mobs?  Once that becomes a norm, there will never be such a thing as closure.  I would pray that those people who are sincerely liberal (in the true sense of the word) will stop enabling those elements in our society that seek not actual justice, but vengeance through coercion.

You're really not very smart, are you?  Black Lives Matter is in no way saying that black lives matter more than other lives.  It's a statement that black lives so often do not seem to matter, and they should matter equally to other lives.  If you don't understand that, no one can help you.

He never ceases to amaze me (in the most negative way possible).
Every chance he gets, he needs to degrade the BLM movement, and in essence dog-on black citizens through-out our nation.

You're absolutely correct.  I will degrade BLM when I get the chance.  They've earned the degradation by their behavior in multiple American cities over the past year.  That you have a noble-sounding name does not mean you are a noble group, and there is nothing noble about BLM.

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. (John 3:16)

For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it.
Matthew 16:25

For whosoever will save his life shall lose it; but whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel's, the same shall save it.  Mark 8:35
And when he had called the people unto him with his disciples also, he said unto them, Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.  Mark 8:34

ALL Lives Matter to God.  They should matter to those who claim to be His Children.  Do ALL Lives Matter?  If that is really so, that should be affirmed.  Whatever the original intent of the name "Black Lives Matter", we're WAY beyond that.  There is no reason for me to believe that MY life matters to BLM, or the lives of anyone in my family.  (There is no evidence the previous two posters consider my life to matter, either.)  People who say they are Christians have a choice; to affirm that ALL Lives Matter, or that just some do.

[South Dakota Democrat]

It's a damn cartoon.

It's a cartoon with a message that implies that a verdict should be about something other than proving a defendant guilty or innocent beyond a reasonable doubt.  ALL Lives Matter.  ALL Lives Matter EQUALLY.  That's God's view on it.  No, I will not pretend otherwise.

The trial was not about whether or not Black Lives Mattered or not; it was about whether or not Derek Chauvin's actions caused George Floyd's death, and whether or not those actions rose to the level of the crimes he was charged with.  Trials should not be about anything else, period.  

What this trial has is the look of a coerced verdict.  This, of course, does not mean that Chauvin was not guilty, and I am certainly not saying that.  But it is indisputable that the threat of massive violent demonstrations would occur in the event of an unsatisfactory verdict; this threat was never disputed and never downplayed by the media, and there was little reason to believe that this threat would be met with enough resistance to preempt significant damage.  What will happen if, indeed, Derek Chauvin's case IS reversed on appeal, even in part where the most severe charges are thrown out?  

How would YOU feel if it were YOU, or a loved one on trial, and the actions of others caused you to believe that the jury would be at risk for their own well-being, or the well-being of their city, if they returned a factual verdict that was not what a mob threatening violence wanted?  There is no place in a free, open, and honest society for a jury to have to think of the consequences if their proper verdict will be received with violence.  It may well be that in this case, the jury's verdict squared with the facts, but do appearances not matter here?  What happens to actual "justice" when the specter of mob violence is a factor at every significant jury trial?

Appearances matter in criminal justice.  What confidence can anyone have in a Criminal Justice system when the verdicts of juries have the appearance of being influenced by the coercive attempts of mobs?  Once that becomes a norm, there will never be such a thing as closure.  I would pray that those people who are sincerely liberal (in the true sense of the word) will stop enabling those elements in our society that seek not actual justice, but vengeance through coercion.

You're really not very smart, are you?  Black Lives Matter is in no way saying that black lives matter more than other lives.  It's a statement that black lives so often do not seem to matter, and they should matter equally to other lives.  If you don't understand that, no one can help you.

He never ceases to amaze me (in the most negative way possible).
Every chance he gets, he needs to degrade the BLM movement, and in essence dog-on black citizens through-out our nation.

You're absolutely correct.  I will degrade BLM when I get the chance.  They've earned the degradation by their behavior in multiple American cities over the past year.  That you have a noble-sounding name does not mean you are a noble group, and there is nothing noble about BLM.

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. (John 3:16)

For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it.
Matthew 16:25

For whosoever will save his life shall lose it; but whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel's, the same shall save it.  Mark 8:35
And when he had called the people unto him with his disciples also, he said unto them, Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.  Mark 8:34

ALL Lives Matter to God.  They should matter to those who claim to be His Children.  Do ALL Lives Matter?  If that is really so, that should be affirmed.  Whatever the original intent of the name "Black Lives Matter", we're WAY beyond that.  There is no reason for me to believe that MY life matters to BLM, or the lives of anyone in my family.  (There is no evidence the previous two posters consider my life to matter, either.)  People who say they are Christians have a choice; to affirm that ALL Lives Matter, or that just some do.

Or maybe, just maybe, most of those protests started out peaceful but then were hijacked by people with a different agenda later on?  Too difficult of a concept for you to grasp, I think.

You're the most insufferable poster on this site.

[John Dule]

Violent looters are not "peaceful protesters," and nobody cares about what Christians think of this subject.

[ProudModerate2]

Violent looters are not "peaceful protesters," and nobody cares about what Christians think of this subject.

Oh come-on John Dule.
It's the usual lines of Scripture, accompanied with a small pinch (more like a handful) of HATE.

[Fuzzy Says: "Abolish NPR!"]

Violent looters are not "peaceful protesters," and nobody cares about what Christians think of this subject.

Oh come-on John Dule.
It's the usual lines of Scripture, accompanied with a small pinch (more like a handful) of HATE.

Hate?

I'm not the one calling for pigs in a blanket to be fried like bacon.

I'm not the one who's burning Federal courthouses.

You're not the one calling THOSE folks out.

Perhaps you're a tad confused. 

[Badger]

It's a damn cartoon.

It's a cartoon with a message that implies that a verdict should be about something other than proving a defendant guilty or innocent beyond a reasonable doubt.  ALL Lives Matter.  ALL Lives Matter EQUALLY.  That's God's view on it.  No, I will not pretend otherwise.

The trial was not about whether or not Black Lives Mattered or not; it was about whether or not Derek Chauvin's actions caused George Floyd's death, and whether or not those actions rose to the level of the crimes he was charged with.  Trials should not be about anything else, period.  

What this trial has is the look of a coerced verdict.  This, of course, does not mean that Chauvin was not guilty, and I am certainly not saying that.  But it is indisputable that the threat of massive violent demonstrations would occur in the event of an unsatisfactory verdict; this threat was never disputed and never downplayed by the media, and there was little reason to believe that this threat would be met with enough resistance to preempt significant damage.  What will happen if, indeed, Derek Chauvin's case IS reversed on appeal, even in part where the most severe charges are thrown out?  

How would YOU feel if it were YOU, or a loved one on trial, and the actions of others caused you to believe that the jury would be at risk for their own well-being, or the well-being of their city, if they returned a factual verdict that was not what a mob threatening violence wanted?  There is no place in a free, open, and honest society for a jury to have to think of the consequences if their proper verdict will be received with violence.  It may well be that in this case, the jury's verdict squared with the facts, but do appearances not matter here?  What happens to actual "justice" when the specter of mob violence is a factor at every significant jury trial?

Appearances matter in criminal justice.  What confidence can anyone have in a Criminal Justice system when the verdicts of juries have the appearance of being influenced by the coercive attempts of mobs?  Once that becomes a norm, there will never be such a thing as closure.  I would pray that those people who are sincerely liberal (in the true sense of the word) will stop enabling those elements in our society that seek not actual justice, but vengeance through coercion.

You're really not very smart, are you?  Black Lives Matter is in no way saying that black lives matter more than other lives.  It's a statement that black lives so often do not seem to matter, and they should matter equally to other lives.  If you don't understand that, no one can help you.

He never ceases to amaze me (in the most negative way possible).
Every chance he gets, he needs to degrade the BLM movement, and in essence dog-on black citizens through-out our nation.

You're absolutely correct.  I will degrade BLM when I get the chance.  They've earned the degradation by their behavior in multiple American cities over the past year.  That you have a noble-sounding name does not mean you are a noble group, and there is nothing noble about BLM.

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. (John 3:16)

For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it.
Matthew 16:25

For whosoever will save his life shall lose it; but whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel's, the same shall save it.  Mark 8:35
And when he had called the people unto him with his disciples also, he said unto them, Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.  Mark 8:34

ALL Lives Matter to God.  They should matter to those who claim to be His Children.  Do ALL Lives Matter?  If that is really so, that should be affirmed.  Whatever the original intent of the name "Black Lives Matter", we're WAY beyond that.  There is no reason for me to believe that MY life matters to BLM, or the lives of anyone in my family.  (There is no evidence the previous two posters consider my life to matter, either.)  People who say they are Christians have a choice; to affirm that ALL Lives Matter, or that just some do.

Fuzzy Bear blabbering inanities in bad faith? Must be a day that ends in y.

[Fuzzy Says: "Abolish NPR!"]

It's a damn cartoon.

It's a cartoon with a message that implies that a verdict should be about something other than proving a defendant guilty or innocent beyond a reasonable doubt.  ALL Lives Matter.  ALL Lives Matter EQUALLY.  That's God's view on it.  No, I will not pretend otherwise.

The trial was not about whether or not Black Lives Mattered or not; it was about whether or not Derek Chauvin's actions caused George Floyd's death, and whether or not those actions rose to the level of the crimes he was charged with.  Trials should not be about anything else, period.  

What this trial has is the look of a coerced verdict.  This, of course, does not mean that Chauvin was not guilty, and I am certainly not saying that.  But it is indisputable that the threat of massive violent demonstrations would occur in the event of an unsatisfactory verdict; this threat was never disputed and never downplayed by the media, and there was little reason to believe that this threat would be met with enough resistance to preempt significant damage.  What will happen if, indeed, Derek Chauvin's case IS reversed on appeal, even in part where the most severe charges are thrown out?  

How would YOU feel if it were YOU, or a loved one on trial, and the actions of others caused you to believe that the jury would be at risk for their own well-being, or the well-being of their city, if they returned a factual verdict that was not what a mob threatening violence wanted?  There is no place in a free, open, and honest society for a jury to have to think of the consequences if their proper verdict will be received with violence.  It may well be that in this case, the jury's verdict squared with the facts, but do appearances not matter here?  What happens to actual "justice" when the specter of mob violence is a factor at every significant jury trial?

Appearances matter in criminal justice.  What confidence can anyone have in a Criminal Justice system when the verdicts of juries have the appearance of being influenced by the coercive attempts of mobs?  Once that becomes a norm, there will never be such a thing as closure.  I would pray that those people who are sincerely liberal (in the true sense of the word) will stop enabling those elements in our society that seek not actual justice, but vengeance through coercion.

You're really not very smart, are you?  Black Lives Matter is in no way saying that black lives matter more than other lives.  It's a statement that black lives so often do not seem to matter, and they should matter equally to other lives.  If you don't understand that, no one can help you.

He never ceases to amaze me (in the most negative way possible).
Every chance he gets, he needs to degrade the BLM movement, and in essence dog-on black citizens through-out our nation.

You're absolutely correct.  I will degrade BLM when I get the chance.  They've earned the degradation by their behavior in multiple American cities over the past year.  That you have a noble-sounding name does not mean you are a noble group, and there is nothing noble about BLM.

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. (John 3:16)

For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it.
Matthew 16:25

For whosoever will save his life shall lose it; but whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel's, the same shall save it.  Mark 8:35
And when he had called the people unto him with his disciples also, he said unto them, Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.  Mark 8:34

ALL Lives Matter to God.  They should matter to those who claim to be His Children.  Do ALL Lives Matter?  If that is really so, that should be affirmed.  Whatever the original intent of the name "Black Lives Matter", we're WAY beyond that.  There is no reason for me to believe that MY life matters to BLM, or the lives of anyone in my family.  (There is no evidence the previous two posters consider my life to matter, either.)  People who say they are Christians have a choice; to affirm that ALL Lives Matter, or that just some do.

Fuzzy Bear blabbering inanities in bad faith? Must be a day that ends in y.

It's amazing that you're an attorney and you won't even address the real issues of potential jury intimidation (indirectly, if not directly) in this case.

ALL LIves Matter, Badger.  Even yours.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

It's a damn cartoon.

It's a cartoon with a message that implies that a verdict should be about something other than proving a defendant guilty or innocent beyond a reasonable doubt.  ALL Lives Matter.  ALL Lives Matter EQUALLY.  That's God's view on it.  No, I will not pretend otherwise.

The trial was not about whether or not Black Lives Mattered or not; it was about whether or not Derek Chauvin's actions caused George Floyd's death, and whether or not those actions rose to the level of the crimes he was charged with.  Trials should not be about anything else, period.  

What this trial has is the look of a coerced verdict.  This, of course, does not mean that Chauvin was not guilty, and I am certainly not saying that.  But it is indisputable that the threat of massive violent demonstrations would occur in the event of an unsatisfactory verdict; this threat was never disputed and never downplayed by the media, and there was little reason to believe that this threat would be met with enough resistance to preempt significant damage.  What will happen if, indeed, Derek Chauvin's case IS reversed on appeal, even in part where the most severe charges are thrown out?  

How would YOU feel if it were YOU, or a loved one on trial, and the actions of others caused you to believe that the jury would be at risk for their own well-being, or the well-being of their city, if they returned a factual verdict that was not what a mob threatening violence wanted?  There is no place in a free, open, and honest society for a jury to have to think of the consequences if their proper verdict will be received with violence.  It may well be that in this case, the jury's verdict squared with the facts, but do appearances not matter here?  What happens to actual "justice" when the specter of mob violence is a factor at every significant jury trial?

Appearances matter in criminal justice.  What confidence can anyone have in a Criminal Justice system when the verdicts of juries have the appearance of being influenced by the coercive attempts of mobs?  Once that becomes a norm, there will never be such a thing as closure.  I would pray that those people who are sincerely liberal (in the true sense of the word) will stop enabling those elements in our society that seek not actual justice, but vengeance through coercion.

You're really not very smart, are you?  Black Lives Matter is in no way saying that black lives matter more than other lives.  It's a statement that black lives so often do not seem to matter, and they should matter equally to other lives.  If you don't understand that, no one can help you.

He never ceases to amaze me (in the most negative way possible).
Every chance he gets, he needs to degrade the BLM movement, and in essence dog-on black citizens through-out our nation.

You're absolutely correct.  I will degrade BLM when I get the chance.  They've earned the degradation by their behavior in multiple American cities over the past year.  That you have a noble-sounding name does not mean you are a noble group, and there is nothing noble about BLM.

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. (John 3:16)

For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it.
Matthew 16:25

For whosoever will save his life shall lose it; but whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel's, the same shall save it.  Mark 8:35
And when he had called the people unto him with his disciples also, he said unto them, Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.  Mark 8:34

ALL Lives Matter to God.  They should matter to those who claim to be His Children.  Do ALL Lives Matter?  If that is really so, that should be affirmed.  Whatever the original intent of the name "Black Lives Matter", we're WAY beyond that.  There is no reason for me to believe that MY life matters to BLM, or the lives of anyone in my family.  (There is no evidence the previous two posters consider my life to matter, either.)  People who say they are Christians have a choice; to affirm that ALL Lives Matter, or that just some do.

Fuzzy Bear blabbering inanities in bad faith? Must be a day that ends in y.

It's amazing that you're an attorney and you won't even address the real issues of potential jury intimidation (indirectly, if not directly) in this case.

ALL LIves Matter, Badger.  Even yours.

There is no evidence whatsoever of jury tampering nor any reason to think anything like that occurred.  Merely alleging the jury may've been intimidated into convicting a defendant is not itself evidence that what you claim actually occurred nor would such an allegation alone be considered such in court. 

If you have actual evidence that what you claim really occurred then by all means, feel free to share with the class, but otherwise you're just choosing to a random conspiracy theory which lacks any basis in fact.  An attorney like Badger (and myself, for that matter) should know better than most how reckless and dangerous it is to conspiracy-monger like that about jury verdicts just because you don't like the outcome. 

With all due respect, this is really one of those put up or shut up situations: either you somehow have real, concrete evidence that jury tampering occurred or there's no reason anyone should pay attention to your allegations of so-called "real issues of potential jury intimidation."  If you're going to make that sort of allegation, the burden is on you to back it up and if you can't, then shouldn't be surprised when folks don't take what you're saying seriously.

[Badger]

And fuzzy? By put up or shut up, we really mean shut up, because you can't put up. So shut up.

Look! There's a foreign looking Cloud you can yell at!

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

It's a damn cartoon.

It's a cartoon with a message that implies that a verdict should be about something other than proving a defendant guilty or innocent beyond a reasonable doubt.  ALL Lives Matter.  ALL Lives Matter EQUALLY.  That's God's view on it.  No, I will not pretend otherwise.

The trial was not about whether or not Black Lives Mattered or not; it was about whether or not Derek Chauvin's actions caused George Floyd's death, and whether or not those actions rose to the level of the crimes he was charged with.  Trials should not be about anything else, period.  

What this trial has is the look of a coerced verdict.  This, of course, does not mean that Chauvin was not guilty, and I am certainly not saying that.  But it is indisputable that the threat of massive violent demonstrations would occur in the event of an unsatisfactory verdict; this threat was never disputed and never downplayed by the media, and there was little reason to believe that this threat would be met with enough resistance to preempt significant damage.  What will happen if, indeed, Derek Chauvin's case IS reversed on appeal, even in part where the most severe charges are thrown out?  

How would YOU feel if it were YOU, or a loved one on trial, and the actions of others caused you to believe that the jury would be at risk for their own well-being, or the well-being of their city, if they returned a factual verdict that was not what a mob threatening violence wanted?  There is no place in a free, open, and honest society for a jury to have to think of the consequences if their proper verdict will be received with violence.  It may well be that in this case, the jury's verdict squared with the facts, but do appearances not matter here?  What happens to actual "justice" when the specter of mob violence is a factor at every significant jury trial?

Appearances matter in criminal justice.  What confidence can anyone have in a Criminal Justice system when the verdicts of juries have the appearance of being influenced by the coercive attempts of mobs?  Once that becomes a norm, there will never be such a thing as closure.  I would pray that those people who are sincerely liberal (in the true sense of the word) will stop enabling those elements in our society that seek not actual justice, but vengeance through coercion.

You're really not very smart, are you?  Black Lives Matter is in no way saying that black lives matter more than other lives.  It's a statement that black lives so often do not seem to matter, and they should matter equally to other lives.  If you don't understand that, no one can help you.

He never ceases to amaze me (in the most negative way possible).
Every chance he gets, he needs to degrade the BLM movement, and in essence dog-on black citizens through-out our nation.

You're absolutely correct.  I will degrade BLM when I get the chance.  They've earned the degradation by their behavior in multiple American cities over the past year.  That you have a noble-sounding name does not mean you are a noble group, and there is nothing noble about BLM.

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. (John 3:16)

For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it.
Matthew 16:25

For whosoever will save his life shall lose it; but whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel's, the same shall save it.  Mark 8:35
And when he had called the people unto him with his disciples also, he said unto them, Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.  Mark 8:34

ALL Lives Matter to God.  They should matter to those who claim to be His Children.  Do ALL Lives Matter?  If that is really so, that should be affirmed.  Whatever the original intent of the name "Black Lives Matter", we're WAY beyond that.  There is no reason for me to believe that MY life matters to BLM, or the lives of anyone in my family.  (There is no evidence the previous two posters consider my life to matter, either.)  People who say they are Christians have a choice; to affirm that ALL Lives Matter, or that just some do.

Fuzzy Bear blabbering inanities in bad faith? Must be a day that ends in y.

It's amazing that you're an attorney and you won't even address the real issues of potential jury intimidation (indirectly, if not directly) in this case.

ALL LIves Matter, Badger.  Even yours.

No one defended Chauvan, his own witness said that carbon monoxide helped Floyd suffocate, that's not a defense and a Civil Lawsuit already was rendered for Floyd in 27 M.

They obviously didn't pay for the funeral of Floyd, state helped them, Floyd was in a gold casket and horse driven carriage, just like Daunte Wright funeral was paid for by Rev Sharpton


This Officer had no wife or any family members by his side, he was alone, you shouldn't sympathize just because he is Officer

[Hindsight was 2020]

And fuzzy? By put up or shut up, we really mean shut up, because you can't put up. So shut up.

Look! There's a foreign looking Cloud you can yell at!

We all know he won’t respond and this just going to be another episode of “Fuzzy throws out an accusation, someone refutes his point, and he leaves the thread without responding”  

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Yeah the cop was an Army Ranger that had no wife, no family and no witnesses to testify on his behalf he was a loner, he had a wife but was divorce, this cop shouldn't be sympathized by anyone

[TheReckoning]

And fuzzy? By put up or shut up, we really mean shut up, because you can't put up. So shut up.

Look! There's a foreign looking Cloud you can yell at!

We all know he won’t respond and this just going to be another episode of “Fuzzy throws out an accusation, someone refutes his point, and he leaves the thread without responding”  

That’s better than a perpetual back and forth that goes nowhere and just creates huge quote chains that clog up the thread.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

And fuzzy? By put up or shut up, we really mean shut up, because you can't put up. So shut up.

Look! There's a foreign looking Cloud you can yell at!

We all know he won’t respond and this just going to be another episode of “Fuzzy throws out an accusation, someone refutes his point, and he leaves the thread without responding”  

That’s better than a perpetual back and forth that goes nowhere and just creates huge quote chains that clog up the thread.

Better quote chains than blockchains!

[GP270watch]

Does anybody know what's happening with Derek Chauvin's tax charges?