Looks like malpractice.
As Gustave Le Bo lamented: “The masses have never thirsted after truth. They turn aside from evidence that is not to their taste, preferring to deify error, if error seduces them. Whoever can supply them with illusions is easily their master; whoever attempts to destroy their illusions is always their victim.”
Isnt it a red herring deflection rather than a valid defense that if floyd was a healthy person he wouldnt have died?
The defense never made a defense, they made a red herring deflection.
Into the Night (04-22-2021)
Looks like malpractice. Looks like railroading.
Looks like a scam.
How is arguing some other hypothetical scenario properly and responsably arguing the scenario they were charged with?
Presenting an argument based on a scenario where floyd was some other floyd wasnt misrepresentation by the defense? If he were some other guy he wouldnt have died, sure, but he wasnt. So how is that arguing that the cop didnt kill him? It's not, is it?
The cop's legal team totally roled him.
They only presented a red herring deflection.
That is terrible. It is no defense at all. Floyd was alive. When Chauvin got done with him he was dead. That is murder. They would have to argue about how healthy he would have to be to count as murder. You could run through a hospital cancer ward with a machete chopping heads off and it would it be a crime. They were sick and dying anyway.
"Abortion is not murder under any state law." -- Flash
"Abortion is not a moral issue. " --BidenPresident
"Propaganda can also be factual." --Flash
"Even after being vaccinated, you shed virus particles." --Jerome
"Trump was not a conservative." --Jarod
"Mandates are the way to avoid further restrictions." --Trudeau
"you wanna go down the 'corporations are people' and 'unlimited campaign spending is free speech' rabbit hole?" --AssHatZombie
Everything else debunked here
Bookmarks