I think it needs a unanimous decision from the jury for him to be found guilty too? It doesn't seem hard to imagine at least one person in that group will opt for a not guilty take.

I think I'll be most surprised if he is found guilty of anything.

He will be let off the worst charges for sure.

Manslaughter no doubt.

Verdict: guilty 2nd degree. Guilty 3rd degree. Guilty manslaughter.

A surprise but a welcome one.

Shocked. Hopefully this makes police reconsider some of their tactics.

To get unanimous verdict on the worst of the counts is ridiculous.

I'm a wee bit confused - how does he get a guilty verdict in all three charges? I havent really followed the case because, to be honest, the guilt was obvious. But I would have thought once you are guilty of 2nd Degree Murder, the rest aren't needed?

RedDave2 wrote:

I'm a wee bit confused - how does he get a guilty verdict in all three charges? I havent really followed the case because, to be honest, the guilt was obvious. But I would have thought once you are guilty of 2nd Degree Murder, the rest aren't needed?

They consider them separately and the charges get merged into the worst offence.

monkey wrote:

I'm a wee bit confused - how does he get a guilty verdict in all three charges? I havent really followed the case because, to be honest, the guilt was obvious. But I would have thought once you are guilty of 2nd Degree Murder, the rest aren't needed?

They consider them separately and the charges get merged into the worst offence.

Yeah - but surely if he is guilty of murder he cant be guilty of manslaughter? I mean, no one is going to mind that this prick gets charged with all three but I thought that Third Degree Murder and Manslaughter were generally the same thing.

monkey wrote:

I think they need to consider them individually because of appeals and what not. If he appeals and wins against the worst murbut der offence he gets off scot free if they don’t have other guilty verdicts. But I don’t know what differences there are between the offences.

That does make a bit more sense alright. I'm sure he will appeal unfortunately.

Now stomp on the rest of them.

RedDave2 wrote:

monkey wrote:

I think they need to consider them individually because of appeals and what not. If he appeals and wins against the worst murbut der offence he gets off scot free if they don’t have other guilty verdicts. But I don’t know what differences there are between the offences.

That does make a bit more sense alright. I'm sure he will appeal unfortunately.

The second degree one is about the fact he assaulted Floyd, the third is about endangering lives and the manslaughter one is about intent There's some differentials between them. The jury basically said he did all three.

‘Thank you jury’ you mean Nancy. Jeez.

Touching phone call to Floyd’s family from Biden. Isn’t it lovely that orange turd is no longer POTUS.

16 year old black girl shot dead by police as the verdict was read out. Body Cam footage has been released.

Yeah we'll have to wait for the full bodycam stuff to be released, I'm confused why the cop didnt use a tazer? Like the two girls were right next to each other, in a scuffle, and he shoots anyway? He's lucky he didn't miss. 

He shouted at her to get on the ground repeatedly, could have just gone in himself, it's a 16 year old girl not fucking She Hulk my man. I know people will say "It's not the cops job to get shot/stabbed while on duty" cool, it's not the member of public being attacked responsibility to take a knife wound either while you're there on the scene already to protect and serve, you melon. 

Even then, where was the tazer bro? Fuck he could have just pepper sprayed them both or some shit, even the tazer would surely have been a risk of hitting the other person as well?

I really want to remain level headed but it's very difficult to not feel like these guys are looking for any excuse to use their guns when this happens.

If you equip officers with guns they are going to use them in situations like that one.