Unless there is some kind of Gross Misconduct here there is no way any appellate court is going to overturn this. Let’s be honest...the Civil Unrest that would occur alone will make any court extremely hesitant to overturn this verdict. Judges are human beings and they sure as shit would feel pressure to not touch this thing. Like I said, he’s toast.
If it was me, I would have gotten new IDs and flee'd the country. I assumed cops have a bit of cash stored away for emergencies and gotten a flight to some Asian country and live the rest of his 20-30 years there quietly, kinda like what Jewdonk did, but Chauvin would be forced to.
juries are drawn from their community and their decisions reflect their community standards
in the Chauvin case the jury/community showed their standards---now those folks have to live by them
i just wish they stay there and away from my place---i won't be going to Minnesota
(long before there was a PFA i had my Grenade & Crossbones avatar at DD)
No it isn't. The Supreme Court didn't hear challenges to the 2020 election because each state ran its own election according to law. There was no basis AT ALL for the allegations made by those claiming fraud. And Texas has no standing AT ALL to tell Pennsylvania how to run its elections.Originally Posted by desertrunner
This is exactly why the SCOTUS didnt heat the 2020 election challenge, Judge Roberts was heard outside screaming inside that there are riots going on out there.
Face it, TRUMP LOST. BY A LOT.
SOBCHAK SECURITY 213-799-7798
PRESIDENT JOSEPH R. BIDEN JR., THE GREAT AND POWERFUL
Well of course you think so.I think the jury was really biased from the beginning and racism was a factor. I dont feel racism was a factor in this case.
How about all the cases where the cops were acquitted, those were all totally fair right?
If you don't like the result, it's rigged, biased or racist. Sort of like how you can't accept that BIDEN WON IN A LANDSLIDE FAIR AND SQUARE.
SOBCHAK SECURITY 213-799-7798
PRESIDENT JOSEPH R. BIDEN JR., THE GREAT AND POWERFUL
Cops don't make big money and have a thankless job.
If he ran they'd find him unless he ran somewhere without extradition which limits him to mostly shitty places.
SOBCHAK SECURITY 213-799-7798
PRESIDENT JOSEPH R. BIDEN JR., THE GREAT AND POWERFUL
I think the court case decision was partially based on racism.Walter Sobchak: When you don't like the outcome, it's racist.
Last edited by desertrunner; 04-20-2021 at 06:18 PM.
Cops don't make big money and have a thankless job.
If he ran they'd find him unless he ran somewhere without extradition which limits him to mostly shitty places.
There are plenty of decent places he could have lied low, worked a menial job on cash, and lived quietly. Spending years in prison with constant threat of violence is worse than living free in any "shitty country" as you say
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/su...houting-match/No it isn't. The Supreme Court didn't hear challenges to the 2020 election because each state ran its own election according to law. There was no basis AT ALL for the allegations made by those claiming fraud. And Texas has no standing AT ALL to tell Pennsylvania how to run its elections.
DesertRunner, according to the above article at snopes.com, Roberts did not shout, the Supreme Court never met face to face during that time, and the story is fake--it took me all of 5 minutes to find and read the above
so to quote the Dude in The Big Lebowski: "you're not wrong Walter, but..." (we all know the rest)
(long before there was a PFA i had my Grenade & Crossbones avatar at DD)
SNOPEShttps://www.snopes.com/fact-check/su...houting-match/
DesertRunner, according to the above article at snopes.com, Roberts did not shout, the Supreme Court never met face to face during that time, and the story is fake--it took me all of 5 minutes to find and read the above
so to quote the Dude in The Big Lebowski: "you're not wrong Walter, but..." (we all know the rest)
ROFL
Except that he IS wrong.https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/su...houting-match/
DesertRunner, according to the above article at snopes.com, Roberts did not shout, the Supreme Court never met face to face during that time, and the story is fake--it took me all of 5 minutes to find and read the above
so to quote the Dude in The Big Lebowski: "you're not wrong Walter, but..." (we all know the rest)
I'm sure he saw it on a facebook meme on one of his racist Trump circle jerks and just assumed it was true.
SOBCHAK SECURITY 213-799-7798
PRESIDENT JOSEPH R. BIDEN JR., THE GREAT AND POWERFUL
Good lesson.
SNOPES, MORE LIKE NOPES, AMIRITE?SNOPES
SOBCHAK SECURITY 213-799-7798
PRESIDENT JOSEPH R. BIDEN JR., THE GREAT AND POWERFUL
Obligatory - NOT The Onion
https://www.foxnews.com/us/oj-simpso...rge-floyd-case
OJ Simpson says Derek Chauvin 'deserves' to be convicted for George Floyd's death
OJ Simpson on Tuesday said he believes former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin "deserves" to be convicted for the death of George Floyd, while also reacting to recent comments made by Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., who is facing criticism for encouraging protesters to "stay on the street" and to "get more confrontational."
Simpson, 73, made the remarks in a video posted to his Twitter account with the caption: "Verdict Watch."
Jurors in the Chauvin trial began deliberations Monday after weeks of testimony from dozens of witnesses. He is charged with second-degree unintentional murder, third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter in connection with the May 25, 2020 death of Floyd. The trial came after nearly a year of protests and riots over video footage showing Chauvin pinning his knee on Floyd's neck. A verdict was expected to be announced Tuesday.
In his video, Simpson said he hoped there is "some kind of verdict, a conviction. I think the man deserves it."
"I thought it was a classic case of depraved indifference. I thought it was unnecessary force and no matter which side you're on, I think everybody would pretty much have to agree that if those deputies and Chauvin would have gotten off of George Floyd, there was no chance George Floyd was going to get up and try to run... try to attack them in handcuffs, " he said. "That didn't seem to be his personality."
"It seemed that the only problem was that, he has a little problem with claustrophobia, I guess, and the smallness of the backseat of that (police) car, which had to be pretty tough on a guy his size," he continued.
Simpson also commented on the ongoing criticism of Waters, who has come under fire from conservatives for what they see as charged rhetoric before demonstrators in Minnesota. She made the remarks over the weekend when she traveled to the state to support demonstrators protesting against the killing of Daunte Wright.
"We’ve got to stay on the street," Waters said. "And we’ve got to get more active. We’ve got to get more confrontational. We’ve got to make sure that they know that we mean business."
Simpson also commented on the ongoing criticism of Rep. Maxine Waters, who has come under fire from conservatives for what they see as charged rhetoric before demonstrators in Minnesota. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
The remarks came after days of unrest and clashes between demonstrators and authorities in Brooklyn Center.
Chauvin's defense attorney Eric Nelson requested a mistrial Monday, saying her comments and the extensive media coverage of the trial could have influenced the jury.
"I just don't know how this jury can really be… that they are free from the taint of this," Nelson told Hennepin County Judge Peter Cahill. "Now that we U.S. representatives threatening acts of in relation to this specific case. It’s mind-boggling."
In response, Cahill acknowledged Waters' comments could work in Chauvin's favor if he's convicted.
"I’ll give you that Congresswoman Waters may have given you something on appeal that may result in this whole trial being overturned," he said. "I wish elected officials would stop talking about this case. Especially in a manner that is disrespectful to the rule of law and to the judicial branch in our function."
Simpson said he believes Water's comments were not meant to incite violence
"I understood what she was saying. It was a call to arms," he said. "Not to necessarily physical arms but a call to come out and work and vote.
"But she's got to understand that her words matter and she's got to be a lot clear about how she says them because you can't be critical of the other side during the (Jan. 6 Capitol) insurrection when they were saying 'Get out and fight,' 'You've got to fight,' and criticize what they were saying when they claimed later on that they meant pretty much what Maxine Waters meant," he added. "You would think these politicians could communicate a lot better than evidently than they've been doing."
Simpson's murder trial in the 1990s lasted nearly nine months and received worldwide media coverage. The proceedings became a defining moment on race and policing in America, with Los Angeles still reeling from the 1992 riots after four white LAPD officers were acquitted of beating Rodney King.
Jurors acquitted him of the murders of his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend Ronald Goldman after less than four hours of deliberation.
Years later, Simpson was convicted of armed robbery and other charges and was released from a Nevada prison in 2017 after nine years.
OJ IS GOD CUCKS
PokerFraudAlert...will never censor your claims, even if they're against one of our sponsors. In addition to providing you an open forum report fraud within the poker community, we will also analyze your claims with a clear head an unbiased point of view. And, of course, the accused will always have the floor to defend themselves.-Dan Druff
You're more correct than you think you are.
Snopes is total trash when it comes to any political matter. They're super left-biased, and yet they posture as if they're doing fair and impartial fact checking.
Snopes is a great site to read about possible internet hoaxes, but they're useless for political fact checking, unless you're a lefty wanting to validate your own biases.
With that said, I believe their report linked above about Roberts, as they had actual evidence backing it up, and it happened to fit their preferred narrative anyway.
why did he label the crossbow-gun looking thing violence? isn't violence expressly implied when showing a weapon?I think he got a piece of that $27 million settlement for George Floyd's family.
This picture leaves me with more questions than answers
https://www.nationandstate.com/2020/...ction-lawsuit/You're more correct than you think you are.
Snopes is total trash when it comes to any political matter. They're super left-biased, and yet they posture as if they're doing fair and impartial fact checking.
Snopes is a great site to read about possible internet hoaxes, but they're useless for political fact checking, unless you're a lefty wanting to validate your own biases.
With that said, I believe their report linked above about Roberts, as they had actual evidence backing it up, and it happened to fit their preferred narrative anyway.
same rebuttal of Roberts screaming, this time via a source quoting Epoch Times (you got a problem with that one also Druff?)...looks like the rebuttal stands
(long before there was a PFA i had my Grenade & Crossbones avatar at DD)
Epoch Times LMAOhttps://www.nationandstate.com/2020/...ction-lawsuit/
same rebuttal of Roberts screaming, this time via a source quoting Epoch Times (you got a problem with that one also Druff?)...looks like the rebuttal stands
SOBCHAK SECURITY 213-799-7798
PRESIDENT JOSEPH R. BIDEN JR., THE GREAT AND POWERFUL
Walter, please explain...Snopes is left wing? Epoch right wing? seems that even though they have opposing political ideologies, they agree Justice Roberts didn't scream...Epoch Times LMAO
so why don't you cite what sources you think proves the matter or just forget it, be silent and go bowling.
(long before there was a PFA i had my Grenade & Crossbones avatar at DD)
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote
