Originally Posted by Mission146 View Post

That's factually inaccurate. In the State of Minnesota, third-degree murder does not require intent to kill. Specifically, it can merely require indifference to whether or not the person lives or dies. If I had to express Chauvin's facial expressions throughout in a word, "Indifferent," would be on my short list. In fact, Third-Degree Murder is the charge they use specifically for absence of intent.

EDIT-ADDED----Sorry, I see this part was already addressed.



You would definitely make the argument, but I'm not sure it holds water when you're talking about the better part of ten minutes.

I have no idea how the case will turn out, but Chauvin does have a defense. I expect he will be found guilty on some lesser charge of police brutality. I do not believe he will be convicted of third-degree murder, from what I read third-degree murder is. It’ll be interesting to see what happens. If it doesn’t turn out the way the liberals want, watch out.

And I do think if our criminal justice system had done its job this would’ve never happened. Floyd would’ve been sitting in jail behind bars rather than out in society committing another crime.
Yeah, some sort of police brutality or maybe involuntary manslaughter.

Ask you this: Now knowing third-degree does not require intent, if the prosecution offered you a plea deal for Involuntary Manslaughter, and you're Chauvin's attorney, do you take the deal?
Yes, I would take it. Like you said, for almost 10 mins doing what he did is hard to justify.

But I doubt if the prosecution politically will be able to do that, meaning offer Chauvin a plea deal. It’d look like they were letting Chauvin off easy. I think they will have to go forward with the 3rd degree murder charges, which might be an overreach. I mean some people want 1st degree murder charges. There’s a big group like MWP that wants Chauvin burned at the stake without any trial.

There are several articles about Minneapolis neck resistant procedures. It can be used in theee cases. And Chauvin use of it fits one of those cases, based on what Floyd did. So Chauvin was technically following police protocol.

Then the question becomes when should Chauvin have stopped. That’s a more difficult question to answer than people think. Obviously, Floyd saying he can’t breath isn’t good for Chauvin.

The couple things Chauvin has going for him is the autopsy report and other police were kneeing on Floyd too. How can the defense prove who really killed him?

I agree it’s hard to watch, and it’s hard to see Chauvin not understanding what it looked like to others. I expect in Chauvin’s mind he felt he was just implementing a move he was taught to restrain a man who continually resisted arrest. There is no question Chauvin took it too far. But to say he intended to kill a man that day is ridiculous.

Like you said, 3rd degree doesn’t require “intent” so they have a chance to get him on that. But it could fail. It’s definitely not a slam dunk case.