|
|
Post by stefano on Apr 6, 2021 18:42:23 GMT
Ah a logical point plainmoorpete but you can only take logic so far. The first thing that happens at the trial is that the charge (accusation) is read out. The accused then says "I didn't do it" (normally phrased as "Not Guilty")......so the accused has already said "I didn't do it" before the prosecution case is presented. 😉
|
|
|
|
Post by stefano on Apr 8, 2021 6:28:37 GMT
Well I caught a report on the news of the proceedings yesterday and they showed a couple of clips to illustrate their report. It seems the prosecution case is starting to unravel.
A problem with this one (and indeed not an uncommon trait in human nature) is that the world and his wife seemed to have made up their minds before arrest let alone before trial.
When a trial is listed for a month you can be sure that there will be a lot more to come out and a lot more to consider than people previously used when they pre-judged the issue.
Of course the media both main stream and social would have to shoulder much of the blame for that general public mindset, but that is another subject altogether.
Not sure how I managed to get involved with this one this morning. I only logged on looking for the Weymouth match day thread so that I could contribute a suitably depressing forecast to keep our run going! 😉⚽️
|
|
|
|
Post by stewart on Apr 8, 2021 23:14:48 GMT
Significant day today as the prosecution produced three expert medical witnesses, including the world's leading pulmonologist. All of them gave compelling testimony as to why the cause of George Floyd's death was a low level of oxygen caused by continued pressure on his neck and back and several other factors. They also gave what appeared to be irrefutable reasons why a drug overdose could not have been responsible.
The defence is still clinging to the assertion that the effects of fentanyl caused a heart attack, but the renowned expert in pulmonology, a 69 year old Irish-American with 46 years experience and the author of a dozen best-selling books, made Eric Nelson look really foolish.
Plenty of opinions, if not evidence, still to come, but it is difficult to see how any of the experts called by the defence can possibly provide more convincing testimony. At the end of the day, the "knee on the neck" video, combined with detailed analyses by today's witnesses, will possibly by enough for the jury.
|
|
|
|
Post by stefano on Apr 9, 2021 6:22:06 GMT
You are right to give that note of caution at the end stewart of "may possibly be enough for the jury".
I have years of experience of criminal justice trials. I have given evidence many times at the crown courts of Plymouth, Exeter, Bodmin Taunton, Belfast (Crumlin Road), and the Central Criminal Court (Old Bailey), and the High Court on The Strand, as well as prosecuting cases in the magistrates courts at Launceston, Liskeard, Callington, and Plymouth before the days of the Crown Prosecution Service when police presented their own cases.
After all that time in court I could never work the jury out. The judge would often give a very clear steer in his 'summing up' but despite that the jury would go against it. I saw acquittals where the evidence seemed irrefutable and convictions where the evidence seemed less clear. It is hardly surprising I suppose this is a group of strangers randomly thrown together without any qualifications or experience and without any training. What other job would you use such a selection system for?
I have to admit I have no experience whatsoever of USA courts, although from the brief clips I have seen on news programmes they seem to treat it as a bit of a circus compared to the serious sombre atmosphere of UK courts.
I do remember having seen news reports of a murder trial in the USA where the accused was a certain O J Simpson. From what I had seen in the news reports had I been a betting man I would have bet my house on a conviction. Not guilty! Many said it was perverse....but it was a jury delivered that verdict.
So your note of caution on what the jury may take notice of was absolutely right stewart.
I would also add that I admire your resilience in sitting through hours of medical evidence, and I would suspect that you are probably paying more attention than some of the jury. 👮♀️
|
|
|
|
Post by stewart on Apr 10, 2021 1:53:43 GMT
Worth watching if you have the time and/or patience:
Every accused person is entitled to a fair trial and to be considered innocent until proven guilty, that's a given. Eric Nelson has so far done an excellent job in attempting to uphold that condition, and yet throughout this trial I have often wondered if he really believes the alternative version or versions of the reasons for George Floyd's death which he is putting forward on behalf of his client. He may be motivated by the fees which his firm will receive, who knows, but I wonder how he will feel if Chauvin is acquitted and then has to live with his own feelings about the truth. He will have done his job but he is only human.
|
|
Rob
TFF member
Posts: 3,607
Favourite Player: Asa Hall
|
Post by Rob on Apr 10, 2021 7:42:34 GMT
Worth watching if you have the time and/or patience: Every accused person is entitled to a fair trial and to be considered innocent until proven guilty, that's a given. Eric Nelson has so far done an excellent job in attempting to uphold that condition, and yet throughout this trial I have often wondered if he really believes the alternative version or versions of the reasons for George Floyd's death which he is putting forward on behalf of his client. He may be motivated by the fees which his firm will receive, who knows, but I wonder how he will feel if Chauvin is acquitted and then has to live with his own feelings about the truth. He will have done his job but he is only human. Yes, he is only human, but it should not be a dilemma for him as a professional, Stewart. He is tasked with a defined constitutional role and it is for the prosecution to prove their case beyond reasonable doubt. |
|
|
|
Post by stefano on Apr 10, 2021 7:54:30 GMT
Absolutely Rob. Good old William Blackstone. We did export something decent to the USA! 😉⚖
|
|
|
|
Post by stewart on Apr 11, 2021 20:18:51 GMT
Ironically, I am finding myself at something of a disadvantage here in terms of an impartial view, as I am old enough to be able to watch both the videos and the testimonies on TV. Perhaps other posters have not watched much of it?
I am confused as to what the defence is now putting forward as its main argument. On the one hand, they are still stressing the point that George Floyd's death was caused by an overdose of fentanyl. On the other, they are suggesting that the inability of the police officers to recognise his distress and ultimately his loss of breath was caused by an angry and ugly mob (six people plus a child, three of whom were shouting, who were kept back by another officer). They can't have it both ways.
As has been stressed, though, it's all down to the jury and whose opinions carry the most weight. At least, it should be on that basis.
|
|
Rob
TFF member
Posts: 3,607
Favourite Player: Asa Hall
|
Post by Rob on Apr 11, 2021 20:36:22 GMT
They can have it both ways, Stewart, though. Any reason that makes the observer feel they cannot be so sure as to be certain to convict is sufficient. Yes, I’ve not been able to take in any of the testimonies, so am nowhere near as well appraised of the evidence as you. Other than having seen the video we have all seen well ahead of the trial.
|
|
|
|
Post by stewart on Apr 14, 2021 0:10:09 GMT
Meanwhile, white police officers continue to kill black people....
|
|
|
|
Post by stefano on Apr 14, 2021 6:51:52 GMT
Meanwhile, white police officers continue to kill black people.... Little bit of a strange mindset there stewart throwing in as evidence on a thread specifically relating to an ongoing trial, an incident which happened after this trial started and which involved completely different circumstances. Are you starting to get a bit twitchy now that the defence have started presenting their case? 😉 |
|
|
|
Post by stewart on Apr 14, 2021 12:27:08 GMT
Meanwhile, white police officers continue to kill black people.... Little bit of a strange mindset there stewart throwing in as evidence on a thread specifically relating to an ongoing trial, an incident which happened after this trial started and which involved completely different circumstances. Are you starting to get a bit twitchy now that the defence have started presenting their case? 😉 Not evidence, just a comment that there seems to be no end to the actions of the racist elements within the police force. The defence don't have a case, they are putting forward a series of witnesses who are being made to look like idiots by the prosecution. The cause of death, and the reason for it, are glaringly obvious, and if the defence succeed in swaying one juror via their nonsense, it will be an injustice like no other. |
|
|
|
Post by stefano on Apr 14, 2021 13:19:09 GMT
I do appreciate stewart that you have a far better understanding of the evidence being put forward in this case as you have been following it closely from the start, while I have only seen a few short reports on news bulletins.
It does seem though that you see this as a race issue (and you are of course perfectly entitled to form your own opinion), whereas I do not believe it to be anything at all to do with race.
I was a police officer for 30 years in two different police forces one in England and one in Northern Ireland. In one of those forces I carried a firearm both on and off duty. Whilst I know that is generally known I am stating it in a way that in parliamentary terms would be 'declaring an interest', as obviously the accused in this case is a police officer.
During my time in the police my worst experience of racism was when it was aggressively directed at me by 8 young British men of West Indian origin from the St Paul's District of Bristol. Being well trained and professional I did not react to their racist abuse and dealt with it appropriately. They were all put before the court for supplying class A controlled drugs. I did not add further charges, which I could have, in respect of their racist behaviour towards me as the sentencing powers of the court were perfectly adequate for the drugs offences.
Racism is definitely not restricted to white people. However I do not believe that the case before this court is racist in nature.
Yes the police officer was white (there are black police officers in the Minnesota Police Department). Yes the criminal was black (there are white criminals as well).
However Floyd was not being arrested because he was black. He was being arrested because he was suspected of a crime which had been reported to the police by a member of the public. Force can be used by police officers when making an arrest and indeed often is necessary. It must of course be proportionate and reasonable.
The same goes for the most recent case which you quoted earlier. From news reports it does sound like gross negligence and incompetence, but you did report it stewart as being another black person killed by the police. You are not alone as the main stream media are saying the same. Factually of course it is correct as it is a black person killed by the police. It does not though mean it was racist in nature.
On the Jeremy Vine show on Channel 5 this morning they made mention of the case and said that he was only stopped because he had an air freshener dangling from his mirror. There was no mention of the man being wanted on warrant, and no mention of the man resisting arrest and trying to escape.
Yes it does seem to be an almighty cock up, and the police officer involved has resigned as has the chief of the police department. But racist? I would again say no. It was again a criminal resisting arrest.
Now I am passing no comment on the evidence in the case the subject of this thread. I do not know enough about it and indeed I have not watched the video of the arrest.
The fact that most people have seen that video within hours of the incident does beg the question of how the accused can possibly get a fair trial after that. I am sure though that the presiding judge will endeavour to make it fair, and the decision in the case will have to be made by the jury based on the evidence presented (and not on anything else).
Do keep the updates coming though stewart there is nothing at all wrong in having different views on things, and if you get the chance to update I would be interested in knowing when the summing up is about to start as if I am free I would try to catch it.
Well this started off as a reply of a few lines but I do tend to ramble when I get going! Back now to trying to think of a suitably gloomy forecast for the Woking game! 😉
|
|
|
|
Post by stewart on Apr 14, 2021 13:52:04 GMT
I do appreciate stewart that you have a far better understanding of the evidence being put forward in this case as you have been following it closely from the start, while I have only seen a few short reports on news bulletins. It does seem though that you see this as a race issue (and you are of course perfectly entitled to form your own opinion), whereas I do not believe it to be anything at all to do with race. I was a police officer for 30 years in two different police forces one in England and one in Northern Ireland. Whilst I know that is generally known I am stating it in a way that in parliamentary terms would be 'declaring an interest', as obviously the accused in this case is a police officer. During my time in the police my worst experience of racism was when it was aggressively directed at me by 8 young British men of West Indian origin from the St Paul's District of Bristol. Being well trained and professional I did not react to their racist abuse and dealt with it appropriately. They were all put before the court for supplying class A controlled drugs. I did not add further charges, which I could have, in respect of their racist behaviour towards me as the sentencing powers of the court were perfectly adequate for the drugs offences. Racism is definitely not restricted to white people. However I do not believe that the case before this court is racist in nature. Yes the police officer was white (there are black police officers in the Minnesota Police Department). Yes the criminal was black (there are white criminals as well). However Floyd was not being arrested because he was black. He was being arrested because he was suspected of a crime which had been reported to the police by a member of the public. Force can be used by police officers when making an arrest and indeed often is necessary. It must of course be proportionate and reasonable. The same goes for the most recent case which you quoted earlier. From news reports it does sound like gross negligence and incompetence, but you did report it stewart as being another black person killed by the police. You are not alone as the main stream media are saying the same. Factually of course it is correct as it is a black person killed by the police. It does not though mean it was racist in nature. On the Jeremy Vine show on Channel 5 this morning they made mention of the case and said that he was only stopped because he had an air freshener dangling from his mirror. There was no mention of the man being wanted on warrant, and no mention of the man resisting arrest and trying to escape. Yes it does seem to be an almighty cock up, and the police officer involved has resigned as has the chief of the police department. But racist? I would again say no. It was again a criminal resisting arrest. Now I am passing no comment on the evidence in the case the subject of this thread. I do not know enough about it and indeed I have not watched the video of the arrest. The fact that most people have seen that video within hours of the incident does beg the question of how the accused can possibly get a fair trial after that. I am sure though that the presiding judge will endeavour to make it fair, and the decision in the case will have to be made by the jury based on the evidence presented (and not on anything else). Do keep the updates coming though stewart there is nothing at all wrong in having different views on things, and if you get the chance to update I would be interested in knowing when the summing up is about to start as if I am free I would try to catch it. Well this started off as a reply of a few lines but I do tend to ramble when I get going! Back now to trying to think of a suitably gloomy forecast for the Woking game! 😉 Your 7-0 forecast for the Sutton game seemed to work pretty well, why not try that again? The reason why I deem incidents like the latest two as racist is the manner in which the police seem to approach black drivers, irrespective of what happens afterwards. In the George Floyd case, one of the officers had his gun drawn even before they alerted him to their presence. I have seen (on TV of course) several instances of police officers speaking to, or shouting at, black drivers in a totally disrespectful manner, often using foul language. Even those who comply are manhandled in a shameful way. I have also seen black drivers stopped because police officers thought that the expensive cars which they were driving could not possibly belong to a black person, so must be stolen. The police officer who shot Jacob Blake seven times in the back has been allowed to resume his position without any punishment or even discipline. There was another instance of this, when an officer shot at a black man who was running away and narrowly missed people in an adjacent car, and he too got off scot free. I shudder to think what will happen on the streets across the country if Chauvin is somehow acquitted. |
|
|
|
Post by stefano on Apr 14, 2021 14:18:37 GMT
Your 7-0 forecast for the Sutton game seemed to work pretty well, why not try that again?  Woking aren't as good as Sutton so I was thinking of 5. I try to make my gloomy forecasts at least believable if everything goes wrong. The decision is finely balanced at the moment as to whether it will be 4, 5, or 6, as indeed the decision in the case the subject of this thread is. Certainly the jury must not find the accused guilty in order to prevent rioting on the streets. Only the evidence must be considered. Of course if rioting did take place it would be racist rioting....by black people!  |
|
Woking aren't as good as Sutton so I was thinking of 5. I try to make my gloomy forecasts at least believable if everything goes wrong. The decision is finely balanced at the moment as to whether it will be 4, 5, or 6, as indeed the decision in the case the subject of this thread is. Certainly the jury must not find the accused guilty in order to prevent rioting on the streets. Only the evidence must be considered. Of course if rioting did take place it would be racist rioting....by black people! 