What do you think Chauvins sentence should’ve been?

[Rabbi]

I can agree with 3rd degree murder but the 2nd degree murder was overkill
Probably knew the city would burn if it didn’t go through

 

[FastBananaCEO]

I can agree with 3rd degree murder but the 2nd degree murder was overkill
Probably knew the city would burn if it didn’t go through

he still used unnecessary force and deserved his sentence but yeah i think 2nd degree was too high

 

[Yliaster]

Probably knew the city would burn if it didn’t go through

yeah true,they basically had to appease the angry public or face civil unrest.

 

[Deleted member 2403]

idc about cuckmerica

 

[Deleted member 11053]

idc about cuckmerica

Based

 

[Deleted member 13137]

he was sacrificed to appease angry negroids. only deserved manslaughter charge

 

[Deleted member 6403]

Wasn't the jury full of jews and zoomers?

 

[( ( ( d[-_-]b ) ) )]

I would have gave him a cheeky slab on the wrist. “ please don’t do that again mate”

 

[Rabbi]

Wasn't the jury full of jews and zoomers?

 

[Deleted member 6403]

View attachment 1102023

It is so fucking over, the jews won and it isn't even funny

 

[Deleted member 5185]

Hard to say considering I don't know the laws nor have the evidence before me.

Assuming his actions were actually the cause of death, and not what the first autopsy report said, then its a question of finding the applicable and provable law.

I think that involuntary manslaughter seems to be the most fitting paragraph. I would believe it to be impossible to prove that he had any intentions of killing the victim - however it was clearly a negligent action.

 

[Rabbi]

It is so fucking over, the jews won and it isn't even funny

 

[Jagged0]

I can agree with 3rd degree murder but the 2nd degree murder was overkill
Probably knew the city would burn if it didn’t go through

A trillion years

 

[Rabbi]

Hard to say considering I don't know the laws nor have the evidence before me.

Assuming his actions were actually the cause of death, and not what the first autopsy report said, then its a question of finding the applicable and provable law.

I think that involuntary manslaughter seems to be the most fitting paragraph. I would believe it to be impossible to prove that he had any intentions of killing the victim - however it was clearly a negligent action.

Yea clear excessive use of force and negligence but I don’t think there’s enough evidence to convince him of purposefully trying to kill him

 

[Deleted member 5185]

Yea clear excessive use of force and negligence but I don’t think there’s enough evidence to convince him of purposefully trying to kill him

Luckily for the BLM movement, the law isn't as important as emotions in the US so it doesn't matter what could be proven and what couldn't. At the end of the day, it was down to the feelings of 12 untrained idiots with no knowledge of the law or how it should be applied.

Here in Norway we got rid of the retarded jury shit. A court even refused a potato verdict and just did it all over again once.

 

[Jason Voorhees]

bumo