Jump to content

Recommended Posts

36 minutes ago, KayakArmada said:

Why is this dude any different than McVeigh ,Tsarnaev, or Desai when it comes to getting a fair and impartial jury? All those guys did a lot more heinous crap (on a sliding shithead scale of course). Just because he was a police officer it’s like he doesn’t deserve the most basic rights to a fair trial. The hypocrisy is just oozing with your statement. 

Let’s be honest here, a TRULY impartial jury is almost impossible for high profile cases, especially when there is video evidence that everybody has seen for months leading up to the trail. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SalinasSpartan said:

That juror rubbed me the wrong way when he came out with public statements almost immediately after the verdict; my first impression was he was clout chasing trying to build up a social media presence. 

No shit.  Him saying he accepted his civic responsibility as a means to enact societal change means he had already found the man guilty.

+++++ this guy to hell.  Even if not declared a mistrial he has given fodder to the it was not a fair trial rhetoric....and in light of his lying ass...that rhetoric has merit now.

This filthy cop murdered a man, the case was cut and dry.  Fuuuuuuuuuck him.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I watched some of the trial. The prosecuting attorney was head and shoulders better than Chauvins defense attorney. If Chauvin had OJs money and defense team he probably would have skated. 

You can see how poor people that can’t afford an attorney and get stuck with a PD two years out of law school have no chance. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Chauvin is  murdering ass +++++, as was clearly laid out in trial.  This juror going on a media blitz to catch fame, after lying to each of the two questions, should be publicly castrated.  Seriously fuuuuuuuuck this dude.

 

 

If that is his aim, it's about as low as you can go.  I am out of the news cycle right now, and perhaps I am better off.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, soupslam1 said:

I watched some of the trial. The prosecuting attorney was head and shoulders better than Chauvins defense attorney. If Chauvin had OJs money and defense team he probably would have skated. 

You can see how poor people that can’t afford an attorney and get stuck with a DA two years out of law school have no chance. 

How does a DA two years out of law school screw over poor defendants? Seems that an inexperienced DA would be in their favor. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, BSUTOP25 said:

How does a DA two years out of law school screw over poor defendants? Seems that an inexperienced DA would be in their favor. 

I think he means DA as in defense, not district attorney. Poor people can only afford an inexperienced guy or play thr public defender lottery

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, misplacedcowboy said:

I think he means DA as in defense, not district attorney. Poor people can only afford an inexperienced guy or play thr public defender lottery

Ah, okay. Still, it’s not like Chauvin’s attorney, Eric Nelson, was right out of law school or a public defender. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, BSUTOP25 said:

Ah, okay. Still, it’s not like Chauvin’s attorney Eric Nelson was right out of law school or a public defender. 

And Chauvin didnt even have to pay for his counsel.  Nelson works for the legal defense fund of the Minnesota Police Association and is a founding partner of a large criminal defense firm.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, RSF said:

And Chauvin didnt even have to pay for his counsel.  Nelson works for the legal defense fund of the Minnesota Police Association and is a founding partner of a large criminal defense firm.

Oh, he paid for his counsel. That’s was 19 years paying dues to your union gets you. That’s pretty much the only reason to pay dues to a police union. 

  • Haha 1
  • Facepalm 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, KayakArmada said:

Oh, he paid for his counsel. That’s was 19 years paying dues to your union gets you. That’s pretty much the only reason to pay dues to a police union. 

LOL...you think his dues would have covered legal costs?  Get real.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KayakArmada said:

Oh, he paid for his counsel. That’s was 19 years paying dues to your union gets you. That’s pretty much the only reason to pay dues to a police union. 

I mean other than the fact that unions routinely get guys fired for cause reinstated with back pay, prevent any kind of accountability, raise police wages to be far above really any comparable government or private sector job, and often hold enough political battles to be able to completely stymie the elected government that pays them

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, KayakArmada said:

Oh, he paid for his counsel. That’s was 19 years paying dues to your union gets you. That’s pretty much the only reason to pay dues to a police union. 

I’m sure the union got the cheapest attorney they could. The guy they got to defend him was piss poor compared to the prosecuting attorney. Whatever the case it would have taken OJs defense team to get him off. And Johnny Cochran wasn’t  going to defend a white cop. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest #1Stunner
2 hours ago, KayakArmada said:

Oh, he paid for his counsel. That’s was 19 years paying dues to your union gets you. That’s pretty much the only reason to pay dues to a police union. 

 

2 hours ago, RSF said:

LOL...you think his dues would have covered legal costs?  Get real.

 

@RSF with the reading problem....  The guy said that paying dues to a police union "gets you" the union paid attorney (like an insurance policy).  Like you pay for an insurance policy.

Not that paying union dues "covers your legal costs".  

Does anyone think that you pay the ENTIRE BENEFIT of an insurance policy?   Apparently RSF does.
 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, #1Stunner said:

 

 

@RSF with the reading problem....  The guy said that paying dues to a police union "gets you" the union paid attorney (like an insurance policy).  Like you pay for an insurance policy.

Not that paying union dues "covers your legal costs".  

Does anyone think that you pay the ENTIRE COST of an insurance policy?   Apparently RSF does.
 

No, I said he didnt have to pay his legal costs.  Which he didnt.  The union did.  And, in the absence of that, his dues would not have covered the legal costs, saving him shitloads of money and allowing him far better legal representation than he could have otherwise afforded.  Thought that was pretty straightforward.  Apparently not.

 

 

You really have been slipping recently.  I hope you're ok.  I'll say a prayer for you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest #1Stunner
5 minutes ago, RSF said:

No, I said he didnt have to pay his legal costs.  Which he didnt.  The union did.  And, in the absence of that, his dues would not have covered the legal costs, saving him shitloads of money.  Thought that was pretty straightforward.  Apparently not.

You really have been slipping recently.

LOL.  You actually think that paying union dues is for the purpose of prepaying legal costs?!? 

Like an installment payment plan?!    You are upset that Union members pay dues, in order to have legal representation as insurance?

RSF, I realize that you a TCU Graduate (Rich Trust Fund kid), and don't understand how it works for common people, but ask someone to explain insurance policies for you....

 

This is common with all Unions.  Think of Teacher Unions. 

 If a school teacher is accused of doing something wrong, and possibly sued, they go to their Teacher Union, and get the benefit of the legal representation (its like an insurance policy).  Do you honestly think that a teacher paying their union dues would pay for the legal costs?  Like a teacher can afford that.   Man, you are naive about how it is for normal folks. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest #1Stunner
2 hours ago, RSF said:

And Chauvin didnt even have to pay for his counsel. 

Nelson works for the legal defense fund of the Minnesota Police Association and is a founding partner of a large criminal defense firm.

^^^ this guy doesn't understand the concept of paying an insurance policy, is "paying for your counsel".

He paid union dues....  He essentially made an insurance claim, on the Union, and they represented him and got this guy Nelson. 

Again... this isn't some sort of police corruption.  This happens with all unions---like I said, look at Teacher Unions. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, #1Stunner said:

 

 

 

Does anyone think that you pay the ENTIRE BENEFIT of an insurance policy?   Apparently RSF does.
 

On average, you pay more, because math

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, soupslam1 said:

I’m sure the union got the cheapest attorney they could. The guy they got to defend him was piss poor compared to the prosecuting attorney. Whatever the case it would have taken OJs defense team to get him off. And Johnny Cochran wasn’t  going to defend a white cop. 

Well, Cochran died 16 years ago, but sure, go ahead and play the race card.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

The evidence of murder is pretty clear, not sure what the defense could do differently.  May as well throw this out.

 

This does not make sense!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...