Chauvin Will Be Innocent- Prepare For Riots

[BFritz21]

(04-14-2021, 06:52 AM)Tiger Teeth Wrote: No, he said you're coming off like one.  And I know I agree, I'm sure there's others.  Why not post something not Anti-Biden?

I'm coming off like one because I'm discussing the facts of the case?

Truth doesn't matter?  It's all about feelings?

Really?

[Au165]

(04-14-2021, 08:11 AM)BFritz21 Wrote:

I'm coming off like one because I'm discussing the facts of the case?

Truth doesn't matter?  It's all about feelings?

Really?

The problem is you aren't actually discussing fact, you are letting your emotions distort facts. I broke down facts for you in your out-of-context video clip montage you sought out to conform to your predetermined beliefs of what you want to have happened. The experts have all indicated that the knee on the back did in fact restrict his breathing. They have all stated that the fentanyl did not cause his death. You keep wanting to fight these two points and are searching for anything that agrees with your pre-determined belief (feelings) about them rather than accepting that these experts know more about it than you do. 

[Belsnickel]

(04-14-2021, 08:20 AM)Au165 Wrote: The problem is you aren't actually discussing fact, you are letting your emotions distort facts. I broke down facts for you in your out-of-context video clip montage you sought out to conform to your predetermined beliefs of what you want to have happened. The experts have all indicated that the knee on the back did in fact restrict his breathing. They have all stated that the fentanyl did not cause his death. You keep wanting to fight these two points and are searching for anything that agrees with your pre-determined belief (feelings) about them rather than accepting that these experts know more about it than you do. 

I want to point out that, specifically, those that examined the body determined the cause of death being the pressure placed on the body restricting the breathing. Any experts can speculate all they like, but no professional can say anything determinatively without doing an examination.

[Tiger Teeth]

(04-14-2021, 08:11 AM)BFritz21 Wrote:

I'm coming off like one because I'm discussing the facts of the case?

Truth doesn't matter?  It's all about feelings?

Really?

*sigh*

[Au165]

(04-14-2021, 08:37 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: I want to point out that, specifically, those that examined the body determined the cause of death being the pressure placed on the body restricting the breathing. Any experts can speculate all they like, but no professional can say anything determinatively without doing an examination.

Right, the "experts" I was mentioning I know one was the actual medical examiner and I think the other examined the body as well but I could be mistaken and they only reviewed the report and video. 

[KillerGoose]

(04-14-2021, 08:20 AM)Au165 Wrote: The problem is you aren't actually discussing fact, you are letting your emotions distort facts. I broke down facts for you in your out-of-context video clip montage you sought out to conform to your predetermined beliefs of what you want to have happened. The experts have all indicated that the knee on the back did in fact restrict his breathing. They have all stated that the fentanyl did not cause his death. You keep wanting to fight these two points and are searching for anything that agrees with your pre-determined belief (feelings) about them rather than accepting that these experts know more about it than you do. 

Bingo.

Brad, you have a pre-conceived notion that you are begging to confirm. You’re using a statement to defend your position that came from the very medical expert that said the death was a homicide and was due to the restraint that the police had Floyd in. There really isn’t much arguing that.

[*michaelsean*]

(04-14-2021, 06:52 AM)Tiger Teeth Wrote: No, he said you're coming off like one.  And I know I agree, I'm sure there's others.  Why not post something not Anti-Biden?

Not commenting on the veracity of the threads, but c’mon. After the last four years?

[Mickeypoo]

So I have an actual, legit question for a change. Shocker, I know, but true.

I see that a key witness, I think friend and dealer, won't have to testify. How does that help or hinder either side and why is a key witness allowed to not testify?

Fred, you can probably answer this.

[Tiger Teeth]

(04-14-2021, 11:38 AM)michaelsean Wrote: Not commenting on the veracity of the threads, but c’mon. After the last four years?

Yeah, but every thread that gets posted is straight off the FOX News headlines.  I bet no one bitched cashing that $1400 Biden got us.

[fredtoast]

(04-14-2021, 01:22 PM)Mickeypoo Wrote: So I have an actual, legit question for a change.  Shocker, I know, but true.

I see that a key witness, I think friend and dealer, won't have to testify.  How does that help or hinder either side and why is a key witness allowed to not testify?

Fred, you can probably answer this.

If the person does not testfy that means it is not a "key" witness.

This usually happens when the lawyers are able to get the same info into evidence through another witness.

[Mickeypoo]

(04-14-2021, 01:51 PM)fredtoast Wrote: If the person does not testfy that means it is not a "key" witness.

This usually happens when the lawyers are able to get the same info into evidence through another witness.

I see.  Thank you.  

So are you saying if a court deems someone a "key" witness they can be forced to testify?  If so, what happens if the person refuses to talk?  Contempt of court?

[BFritz21]

(04-14-2021, 01:50 PM)Tiger Teeth Wrote: Yeah, but every thread that gets posted is straight off the FOX News headlines.  I bet no one bitched cashing that $1400 Biden got us.

I did at some point because of the possibility of inflation.

[fredtoast]

(04-14-2021, 01:51 PM)fredtoast Wrote: If the person does not testfy that means it is not a "key" witness.

This usually happens when the lawyers are able to get the same info into evidence through another witness.

I just read the story and I was completely wrong.

Judge ruled that the witness did not have to testify because he was protected bt Fifth Amendment against testifying about anything that could implicate him in criminal activity.

[Mickeypoo]

(04-14-2021, 02:19 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I just read the story and I was completely wrong.

Judge ruled that the witness did not have to testify because he was protected bt Fifth Amendment against testifying about anything that could implicate him in criminal activity.

Ok.  So even if you are deemed a key witness you can take the 5th if testifying may implicate your own criminal behavior?

[Au165]

(04-14-2021, 02:27 PM)Mickeypoo Wrote: Ok.  So even if you are deemed a key witness you can take the 5th if testifying may implicate your own criminal behavior?

Not Fred but yes. 

[BFritz21]

(04-13-2021, 01:43 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Charlie Kirk's guest?



Seriously?

I'm just now looking at this comment!  It wasn't Charlie Kirk's guest, it WAS A CLIP FROM THE TRIAL WITH A MEDICAL EXPERT ON THE STAND

I know you don't follow links that could possibly conflict with your pre-determined opinions (not going to my website to see that I already had a calendar of my engagements is one example), but THE VIDEO IS IN MY POST!






How can you pretend to comment objectively on this subject when you've just proven that you don't look at facts that contradict your pre-determined beliefs?!

(04-14-2021, 08:20 AM)Au165 Wrote: The problem is you aren't actually discussing fact, you are letting your emotions distort facts. I broke down facts for you in your out-of-context video clip montage you sought out to conform to your predetermined beliefs of what you want to have happened. The experts have all indicated that the knee on the back did in fact restrict his breathing. They have all stated that the fentanyl did not cause his death. You keep wanting to fight these two points and are searching for anything that agrees with your pre-determined belief (feelings) about them rather than accepting that these experts know more about it than you do. 

Not all.  

How was the clip I posted out-of-context?

The medical examiner in my video was obviously nervous and wanted too avoid admitting that the defense was correct, so, if a medical examiner that obviously doesn't want to help Chauvin get an innocent verdict can't even say that Chauvin is for sure guilty, what makes you think that the jury won't be able to at least consider that reasonable doubt?

[Mickeypoo]

(04-14-2021, 02:44 PM)Au165 Wrote: Not Fred but yes. 

Ok, thanks.

[Au165]

(04-14-2021, 02:50 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Not all.  

How was the clip I posted out-of-context?

The medical examiner in my video was obviously nervous and wanted too avoid admitting that the defense was correct, so, if a medical examiner that obviously doesn't want to help Chauvin get an innocent verdict can't even say that Chauvin is for sure guilty, what makes you think that the jury won't be able to at least consider that reasonable doubt?

Because they intentionally cut off the full exchange which I explained. That medical examiner said...IT WAS HOMICIDE DUE TO THE RESTRAINT USED! He goes into clarifying the context he mentioned when answering the question in the clip as he explains why it was in fact not related to Fentanyl and was due to the restraint. If you would have watched the full exchange rather than just the cherry-picked clips in that segment you'd know this.

[Belsnickel]

(04-14-2021, 02:44 PM)Au165 Wrote: Not Fred but yes. 

(04-14-2021, 02:56 PM)Mickeypoo Wrote: Ok, thanks.

To add a little to this, someone can be subpoenaed and forced to be in court. Key witness or not. If they refuse to answer questions, they can be held in contempt. However, all of this is trumped by a person's constitutional rights. If someone could potentially incriminate themselves by giving testimony, then they are protected from testifying. If they are truly a key witness, however, they can receive immunity for certain crimes that they may end up admitting to during their testimony.

Tl;dr: Someone's rights protecting them from self-incrimination overrides attempts to compel them to testify.

[Au165]

The defense is going to want their money back from Dr. Fowler...