Chauvin trial: Defense begins case......WTF?

[madaboutharry]

I don't get it.

Defense theory seems to be "put on a sideshow."

The only way this shit will work is if there is a klansman on the jury.

[Siwsan]

1. Anything to distract the jury away from the man on trial

I honestly can't believe the judge allows past history information on George Floyd, but not on Chauvin since it would 'prejudice the jury'.

[3catwoman3]

7. My husband's sister, some years ago, was in a car crash where...

...she was hit by a person who did not have a a driver’s license. That bit of information was not allowed to be presented at the trial as it might have been “prejudicial.”

[Claire Oh Nette]

10. Double Standard much?

So, belaboring the point that Floyd had drugs in his system is not prejudicial, but a history of complaints against Chauvin is. If it makes blacks look bad, it's persuasive, but if it makes white cops look bad, it's prejudicial.

Malign the dead black man and speak no evil of the live white killer.

This is why words matter. The Right knows this. This is why they play loose with language and can evade the truth.

Methinks Nelson's real strategy is buying time for the appeal.

[Siwsan]

11. It boggles the rational mind.

I did hear one of the reasons Chauvin would be a fool to take the stand is, that might allow his past complaint record to come into evidence.

[sop]

2. If this is the best defense Nelson can put on, he's obviously going for that one cop apologist on

the jury who thinks the police can do no wrong.

[greenjar_01]

3. Old enough to remember when everyone was goofing on Jose Baez's defense of Casey Anthony

"Hahaha! What a clown! Who can believe this shit!"

[madaboutharry]

5. That case was very different.

The Prosecutor overcharged her. They were never going to prove First Degree murder. I believe that if she had been charged with 2nd Degree murder or Manslaughter they would have obtained a conviction.

That case stands as a warning to prosecutors when moving forward with charges in response to public opinion.

[greenjar_01]

6. I'm just sayin'...people see what they want to see

[madaboutharry]

8. That very true.

That is why the world is such a mess.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

4. All it takes is one juror to convince themselves the doubt they have is reasonable.

Defenses don't win pretty.

[Claire Oh Nette]

9. What's th e point of all this video?

Where's he going with this long body cam film clip that shows the cops being assholes to bystanders. Why won't he let that guy have his phone from the car?
Overseers. They're modern day overseers.

I don't see this as planting seeds of doubt. Seems like a giant distraction to confirm timestamps?

Correct?
Wouldn't you agree?

Concerned for officers' safety, concerned that officers were ok. Never mind the dying man...