Comments on: Chauvin loses on appeal

By: Mike-SMO

Mike-SMO — Sat, 22 Apr 2023 01:06:28 +0000

The jury must not have had any first aid training. Floyd clearly had taken drugs. Holding him on his side was the smart move since vomit (a common result of an overdose) would dribble onto the ground instead of being aspirated into the lungs. Lungs don’t respond well to the mixture of stomach acid and digestive enzymes. If you are upset by the way a patient is handled, stay out of an Emergency Room. From what I saw in the video segments, Floyd was held in a safe position in case he fought, convulsed, or passed out and vomited. Allowing Floyd to flop onto his back might have made the fools in the crowd happy, but would have been almost certainly been lethal in an overdose situation. The Police had already called the ambulance for an overdose, but the situation degenerated faster than they expected. Overdoses are like that sometimes.

An Aunt aspirated a can of Fresca (carbonated grapefruit). She died ~2 1/2 days later from the lung damage. Lungs don’t deal well with insults.

By: FOAF

FOAF — Wed, 19 Apr 2023 23:51:20 +0000

Mass Lawyer: that jury was going to convict Chauvin of murder regardless of facts or evidence.

By: Skip

Skip — Wed, 19 Apr 2023 18:48:44 +0000

Our judicial system is broken probably for decades to come. Any Kangaroo Court is giving justice the boot. Any city is afraid of riots to break out again, getting no repayments and as the St Floyd went, billions were lost.
I do feel very sorry for Derek and his family, he is a martyr.

By: Massachusetts Lawyer

Massachusetts Lawyer — Wed, 19 Apr 2023 17:11:10 +0000

Hard to know without actually seeing the video, and always easy to second-guess trial tactics, but I wonder if Chauvin might not have been better served if his attorney had assented to the admission of the Pope video and used it to (1) rebut the suggestion of particular animus toward Floyd; (2) buttress the “acting in accord with dept. policy” defense; (3) place the burden on the state of explaining what the salient difference was in Chauvin’s conduct between Floyd and Pope, where they had cleared Chauvin; (4) emphasize that use of the technique was not designed to cause death?

By: Ray Van Dune

Ray Van Dune — Wed, 19 Apr 2023 16:10:47 +0000

There is only one way to stop the spreading rot of the corrupt American judiciary, and that is through the Supreme Court. Three of the justices are already Democrat political hacks. That’s why the Dems are suddenly desperate to get Clarence Thomas. If they do, and our last hope hangs on a weakling like Roberts, we will be royally screwed.

By: miguel cervantes

miguel cervantes — Wed, 19 Apr 2023 14:20:04 +0000

there is a tenuous link between the three events, the french aided the colonies and incurred a great debt in a continental war, the revolution that arose made catherine willing to suppress the admitttedly weak enlightenment in Russia, that awoke a century later under alexander 2nd, albeit too late,

there are rough parallels in the country from whence my parents came, machado was the despot of the 30s, deposed by the students, the military including batista, were allied with the communists, and they drafted their own version of a green new deal, (probably with the imput of sumner welles) the 1940 constitution, which was unworkable, the students became more militant after the war, the last liberal president, prio was fabulously corrupt, hence batista rode to the rescue, one of the leading reformers, eddie chibas killed himself, and hence
we inherited the wind,

By: miguel cervantes

miguel cervantes — Wed, 19 Apr 2023 14:07:33 +0000

if Alexander 111rd had lived, chances there wouldn’t have been a revolution, or it may have been forestalled, nicholas 2nd was a weak monarch, plagued by the plight of his son, which led to his wife’s dependence on rasputin, the social revolutionaries took advantage of that circumstance, of course azev their second in command was an okrana agent, true liberals like the kadets constitutional democrats were few on the ground,

re louis, he reaped the consequences of aiding the colonies against the english, and a bad harvest, in the course of the little ice age, there were slightly more liberals like lafayette and lavoisier but not much more, the jacobin spirit of rousseau overwhelmed the sensibility of say montesquieu, (sound familiar)

By: BrooklynBoy

BrooklynBoy — Wed, 19 Apr 2023 13:33:47 +0000

Oldflyer
Louis XVI was not an evil opressor and eventually France would have most likely evolved into a Consitutional Monarchy such as Great Britain. As for the Russian Revolution, the real Russian Revolution was in early 1917 lead by Alexander Kerensky which was non violent. What took place on November 7, 1917 (October, 1917 by the calendar that Russia was using) was nothing more than a Bolshevik coup d’etat.

By: BrooklynBoy

BrooklynBoy — Wed, 19 Apr 2023 13:29:26 +0000

It would have been better off if Derek Chauvin had called in sick that day.

By: Art Deco

Art Deco — Wed, 19 Apr 2023 10:09:25 +0000

There were events such as the American Revolution, the French Revolution, and the Russian Revolution, to name just three, that took place because Autocrats went too far.
==
Disagree. From 1860 to 1917, public policy in Russia was salutary in important respects. The most salient was that Russia’s peasantry received fee simple tenure to the land they’d worked. The residue of feudal obligations was eliminated by 1906. You had the colonization of Siberia after 1890 and the extension of modern land tenures there. The development of elected conciliar bodies on the local level in the 1860s and then on the national level in 1905. You also had an abusive police state in Russia, but it was inconsequential compared to what came after. The war was a severe stressor, but the political culture in Russia had developed bizarre elements quite on its own.
==
As for Bourbon France, recall that there were all of seven prisoners in the Bastille when it was stormed. There might have been someone in there on a lettre de cachet for political reasons, but the majority were accused of common crimes and one was confined for insanity. Louis XVI was a ditherer, not a tyrant. The French state was a stew of corruption, incompetence, and confusion and the public finances were a complete mess.
==
As for the situation in Colonial America, you had a completely different agrarian system in the colonies than in the mother country and the colonies were populated with those who’d put all their chips on the table to travel across the sea and farm in some place they’d never seen (or, on occasion, ply a trade as an artisan or merchant). Most of them were religious dissenters as well. Leaving aside slaves, you had about 15 million people under the authority of the British crown in 1776. The American colonial population might not have been as antagonistic as the population of Ireland, but they owned their own land, fought the aboriginals with their own weapons, and had their own institutions of government.