Chat Derek Chauvin Guilty! Fuck yes!

[sy barite]

I personally can’t see anything changing as long as the news is profit driven.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's far far worse than that. The news has always been profit driven, even when journalistic standards and ethics meant something.

If profit was the only motive, you'd see them stirring the pot in such a way as to bring in as many viewers as possible. That's clearly NOT what they're doing. They don't care that they're alienating half of the country.

Corporate America, not just the media, has drunk deeply of the kool-aid that just a few short years ago we thought would only ever be imbibed on University campuses. Ideas that were quite literally laughed at just five years ago have become unquestioned wisdom now at the highest levels. Some go along with it because they're afraid of being accused of being racists or transphobes or whatever, but believe me, there's a very strong small core of true believers--and they're in the driver's seat.

 

[Hornet]

The exculpatory video evidence he was referring to is that which was not admitted, which is understandable. After all, it's the prosecution's job to build the strongest case they can. However, what is the reason that the full video evidence was not widely shared by the media?

I don’t know as I’m not a lawyer. But, both the Prosecution and Defence lawyers had the evidence that could have been leaked to, or shared with, the media. I could only assume they weren’t allowed to share it with the media otherwise Chauvin’s lawyer really dropped the ball on that one if it actually was exculpatory video evidence.

 

[imthedude]

Typical answer from someone who doesn’t have an intelligent argument.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Intelligent arguments are not worth wasting on reactionary crybabies.

 

[henricas]

I would like to think that just being in jail is punishment enough. The only good prisons do is terrify the criminally inclined (deterrence), keep criminals out of society for a while and satisfy the public's need for justice and vengeance. They do not turn criminals into better people, in fact they usually come out damaged, resentful and with no ability to function in normal society. In fact they may come out of prison with more criminal capabilities. Most are damaged people to begin with. And no I do not have a solution (although the Scandinavian countries have some good ideas with low recidivism rates to support them). Sad for the victims and their families and friends, sad for families of criminals and sad for society over all. At the very least there should be a path to redemption and a chance at a normal life after punishment. And why should society pay for it? Because in the long run it costs more when society does not pay for it.

It has been proven that Jails are NOT a proper form of correction OR deterrent.

Jails are only a recreational camp for most criminals. They go there to commit more crimes, refine their skills and get more underworld connections.

Chauvin being a former COP will probably get protective custody and spend 22 0r 23 hours a day in isolation.

Chauvin sentence is only to apeace the WOKE community

 

[henricas]

Burn in hell for doing his job? Not sure how that works.

More great grammar bro. Keep it coming!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As per your statement Chauvin's job is to kill blacks while his colleagues watch ?

You really are a Jimmy D(ummy)

 

[henricas]

Tell me more about your “granma”.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Whaaaaa ????

Good news for you, club 21 called and said they are returning you monthly fees for the past year. Apparently you are too stupid to be a member

 

[henricas]

For you to go all in on the IQ and chromosome stuff and not be able to spell is pretty ironic. I hope you can see that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Say Whaaaa ???

You have no idea what either one is, Correct ?
U R 1 sad MOFO

 

[jimmyd]

What fucking trial were you watching. The video evidence didn’t exonerate him. Even your buddy Ben Shapiro thought the manslaughter conviction was supported by evidence. He just didn’t believe in the murder conviction. You can’t be convicted on one charge and be exonerated (to be absolved of blame) at the same time.

Think before you post.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1384841619346706435

Hey Dumb Dumb, I said that he could’ve gotten a manslaughter. Try reading.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[jimmyd]

Intelligent arguments are not worth wasting on reactionary crybabies.

Said the guy that didn’t watch the trial.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[jimmyd]

As per your statement Chauvin's job is to kill blacks while his colleagues watch ?

You really are a Jimmy D(ummy)

Nice try.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[jimmyd]

Whaaaaa ????

Good news for you, club 21 called and said they are returning you monthly fees for the past year. Apparently you are too stupid to be a member

This is almost as good as “the jerk store called...”. Work on your insults.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[jimmyd]

Say Whaaaa ???

You have no idea what either one is, Correct ?
U R 1 sad MOFO

Yup, I know granma isn’t a word. Give us some more.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Hornet]

Hey Dumb Dumb, I said that he could’ve gotten a manslaughter. Try reading.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Listen you fucking moron....

Exonerate means to absolve of blame. You were making a statement that he should have gotten off and found not guilty when you used that word. Only when sy barite checked you, did you pivot and say, in a brand new post after the fact, that he could have been convicted of manslaughter. Well, he was convicted of manslaughter on the 3rd count dumbass. Not “could’ve”, he actually did. So my question still stands, what fucking trial were you watching if you missed that?

 

[jimmyd]

Listen you fucking moron....

Exonerate means to absolve of blame. You were making a statement that he should have gotten off and found not guilty when you used that word. Only when sy barite checked you, did you pivot and say, in a brand new post after the fact, that he could have been convicted of manslaughter. Well, he was convicted of manslaughter on the 3rd count dumbass. Not “could’ve”, he actually did. So my question still stands, what fucking trial were you watching if you missed that?

Why the anger bro? Instead of 4 years for manslaughter now he’s facing 40 for the other nonsense charges. Yeah, I call 36 years less exonerated.

But that’s beside the point. You missed where I said who convicted him. Who did I say?

Btw, you have proven you didn’t follow it as closely as you claim. Lawyers from all sides say he should’ve been acquitted or maybe guilty of just the manslaughter charge.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Hornet]

Why the anger bro? Instead of 4 years for manslaughter now he’s facing 40 for the other nonsense charges. Yeah, I call 36 years less exonerated.

But that’s beside the point. You missed where I said who convicted him. Who did I say?

Btw, you have proven you didn’t follow it as closely as you claim. Lawyers from all sides say he should’ve been acquitted or maybe guilty of just the manslaughter charge.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You said the mob/politicians/media convicted him. Well, the media didn’t convict him you conspiracy theorist moron, a jury did you idiot.

Exonerated means to absolve of blame. That means he must get zero years in his sentencing. You cannot claim 90% exonerated because he gets 4 years out of 40. He is still convicted of 4 years so he has blame in this. If there is any blame at all (even 1%), he cannot by definition be exonerated.

Lawyers of all sides didn’t say what you said. I didn’t hear the prosecution say that. The only “sides” that count is the Prosecution and Defence. Arm chair quarterback lawyers are nice to hear opinions from but still don’t really matter. And where do you get this “all sides” nonsense? Do you consider “all sides” bitchute, Fox, Newsmax, and OAN only, because the non-conspiracy theory peddling sides that are more centrist or leftist didn’t claim exoneration or only manslaughter. But, I’ve come to expect that from you as you like to claim you are unbiased but you are just another kool-aid drinking motherfucking brainwashed moron sucking on the alt-right’s titty.

As for the anger, I’ve spelled it out repeatedly to you in the other thread that you started with the insults and name calling first. I also told you, I’m never the first one to drop the gloves, but once dropped they never go back on. And, I will remind you that you falsely accused Qing Qing and myself claiming we wanted you to die. I called you out on that and stated you owe us an apologize and to admit you were wrong but instead of acting like a grown up, you deflected and ran away like the little coward you are. So for those reasons you will always be on the receiving end of my wrath whenever I respond to you you cowardly little half-witted fucktard.

 

[henricas]

Yup, I know granma isn’t a word. Give us some more.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

WHAAA ??? what a moron!!!!

 

[henricas]

Nice try.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

TNX

 

[jimmyd]

You said the mob/politicians/media convicted him. Well, the media didn’t convict him you conspiracy theorist moron, a jury did you idiot.

Exonerated means to absolve of blame. That means he must get zero years in his sentencing. You cannot claim 90% exonerated because he gets 4 years out of 40. He is still convicted of 4 years so he has blame in this. If there is any blame at all (even 1%), he cannot by definition be exonerated.

Lawyers of all sides didn’t say what you said. I didn’t hear the prosecution say that. The only “sides” that count is the Prosecution and Defence. Arm chair quarterback lawyers are nice to hear opinions from but still don’t really matter. And where do you get this “all sides” nonsense? Do you consider “all sides” bitchute, Fox, Newsmax, and OAN only, because the non-conspiracy theory peddling sides that are more centrist or leftist didn’t claim exoneration or only manslaughter. But, I’ve come to expect that from you as you like to claim you are unbiased but you are just another kool-aid drinking motherfucking brainwashed moron sucking on the alt-right’s titty.

As for the anger, I’ve spelled it out repeatedly to you in the other thread that you started with the insults and name calling first. I also told you, I’m never the first one to drop the gloves, but once dropped they never go back on. And, I will remind you that you falsely accused Qing Qing and myself claiming we wanted you to die. I called you out on that and stated you owe us an apologize and to admit you were wrong but instead of acting like a grown up, you deflected and ran away like the little coward you are. So for those reasons you will always be on the receiving end of my wrath whenever I respond to you you cowardly little half-witted fucktard.

I have to really be careful. I don’t want any of your wrath.

If you don’t understand what I meant by the mob/media/politicians convicted him, you’re too far gone.

The prosecution had to change their approach based on all the video and photos that came out. For example, they went from knee on the neck to the “neck area” because video showed the knee was more on Floyd’s shoulder and back.

And yes, both liberal and conservative lawyers, that are honest, agree that the most he should’ve gotten was manslaughter. But we should defer to the legal scholar Hornet.com?

The jury was intimidated. On a daily basis the jury was driven through mobs of protesters. What effect do you think that had on them? They also weren’t sequestered. The biggest trial in recent history, and they had access to their phones and TV.

So it’ll be interesting if it is ever deemed a mistrial on appeal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[jimmyd]

WHAAA ??? what a moron!!!!

Only 4 words and you still couldn’t spell all correctly. Wow. You’re a genius.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Hornet]

I have to really be careful. I don’t want any of your wrath.

If you don’t understand what I meant by the mob/media/politicians convicted him, you’re too far gone.

The prosecution had to change their approach based on all the video and photos that came out. For example, they went from knee on the neck to the “neck area” because video showed the knee was more on Floyd’s shoulder and back.

And yes, both liberal and conservative lawyers, that are honest, agree that the most he should’ve gotten was manslaughter. But we should defer to the legal scholar Hornet.com?

The jury was intimidated. On a daily basis the jury was driven through mobs of protesters. What effect do you think that had on them? They also weren’t sequestered. The biggest trial in recent history, and they had access to their phones and TV.

So it’ll be interesting if it is ever deemed a mistrial on appeal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Remember, CAMH is there for you. They are the only ones that can help your type of crazy.