Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Man admits to killing teen after political dispute


el midgetron
 Share

Recommended Posts

 
5 minutes ago, Paranoid Android said:

If that were so you would have said "you are being clear, but I disagree". Instead of that you have tried to argue the semantics of the specific word I used. Yeah, maybe I should have used a different word than "totally", as it opened the door to your particular brand of misrepresentation (arguing the semantics of the word I used rather than the intention behind it). But I didn't, I figured it was obvious what I intended. Tiny Ron certainly grasped what I was saying without ever asking for clarification. How is it that he understood what I said but you can only argue semantics as if that was the important part of my post!?!?

It certainly comes across as you not getting my point! 

Oh get over yourself Mr misrepresentation. What a load of whiney crap.

You don't like how the story was written and want a liars political claim appear earlier in the time line. 

Sounds petty to me and only supports the killer. Your doing it backwards because you hate media 

What's incorrect in that evaluation?

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

You disagree?  I see, what a perfectly cogent argument for dismissing the findings of the Minnesota Department of Human Rights.  How unfortunate for the Mayor of Minneapolis and ChIEf of Police that they didn't consult Paranoid Android from NSW.

I said I don't disagree. You're just trying to make more of it than was ever actually made in court. The facts are that racism was never fingered as any part of an investigation, no one found evidence in Chauvin's life that he was racist. 

As a comparison, compare that to Travis McMichael, who was convicted of the murder of Ahmaud Arbery - there was no "evidence" presented at trial that racism ever played a role, yet it was a simple matter for people to find racist sentiments on Travis McMichael's social media, thus the speculation that racism played a role is warranted in the media here, regardless that there was no racial argument made in court. Derek Chauvin had no such history on his social media, he had no affiliation with any racist groups. He was just a white police officer who put his knees on the neck of a black suspect, and then the media just made a bunch of assumptions that racism was a defining reason for what happened. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Oh get over yourself Mr misrepresentation. What a load of whiney crap.

You don't like how the story was written and want a liars political claim appear earlier in the time line. 

Sounds petty to me and only supports the killer. Your doing it backwards because you hate media 

What's incorrect in that evaluation?

So you simultaneously understood what I said but still chose to focus on my use of the word "totally" anyway despite knowing what I actually meant. The only reason you'd do that is to argue for the sake of arguing.

Good day,  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Paranoid Android said:

I said I don't disagree. You're just trying to make more of it than was ever actually made in court. The facts are that racism was never fingered as any part of an investigation, no one found evidence in Chauvin's life that he was racist. 

As a comparison, compare that to Travis McMichael, who was convicted of the murder of Ahmaud Arbery - there was no "evidence" presented at trial that racism ever played a role, yet it was a simple matter for people to find racist sentiments on Travis McMichael's social media, thus the speculation that racism played a role is warranted in the media here, regardless that there was no racial argument made in court. Derek Chauvin had no such history on his social media, he had no affiliation with any racist groups. He was just a white police officer who put his knees on the neck of a black suspect, and then the media just made a bunch of assumptions that racism was a defining reason for what happened. 

Check the lawsuit by John Pope, Jr., and Zoya Code. Both racism and civil rights violations were charged. Chauvin escaped the charges.

Just seems things might be catching up with him. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Paranoid Android said:

I said I don't disagree. You're just trying to make more of it than was ever actually made in court. The facts are that racism was never fingered as any part of an investigation, no one found evidence in Chauvin's life that he was racist. 

As a comparison, compare that to Travis McMichael, who was convicted of the murder of Ahmaud Arbery - there was no "evidence" presented at trial that racism ever played a role, yet it was a simple matter for people to find racist sentiments on Travis McMichael's social media, thus the speculation that racism played a role is warranted in the media here, regardless that there was no racial argument made in court. Derek Chauvin had no such history on his social media, he had no affiliation with any racist groups. He was just a white police officer who put his knees on the neck of a black suspect, and then the media just made a bunch of assumptions that racism was a defining reason for what happened. 

Chauvin's defence lawyer claimed Chauvin was the product of a broken system.  Subsequently, that "broken system" was found to be racist.  The Chief of the MPD doesn't dispute the finding nor does the Mayor.

I'm not adding anything more than has been produced from an investigation.

Edited by Golden Duck
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Paranoid Android said:

So you simultaneously understood what I said but still chose to focus on my use of the word "totally"

but the vast majority of mainstream media is either ignoring it completely, or trying to make excuses for it

Just now, Paranoid Android said:

anyway despite knowing what I actually meant. The only reason you'd do that is to argue for the sake of arguing.

Good day,  

Totally was a BS claim to as referenced by the links offered, two at least of which were missed by midge whilst complaining those links weren't presented.

You're media bias is the only thing on display here. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

I'm not adding anything more than has been produced from an investigation.

This seems to be a recurring issue.

Police investigation into Brandt isn't getting through to some either. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, psyche101 said:

This seems to be a recurring issue.

Police investigation into Brandt isn't getting through to some either. 

Yeah, cry about MSM while quoting Murdox and ignoring .gov.  Killers don't lie.

If they hanged Joe Biden, Murdox would come out the next day accusing him of being a swinger.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

Chauvin's defence lawyer claimed Chauvin was the product of a broken system.  Subsequently, that "broken system" was found to be racist.  The Chief of the MPD doesn't dispute the finding nor does the Mayor.

I'm not adding anything more than has been produced from an investigation.

Can you provide a link to exactly what you are referring? I followed the case very closely as it unfolded (I watched live streams of the trial on more than one occasion) but I don't recall the details of what you refer. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

but the vast majority of mainstream media is either ignoring it completely, or trying to make excuses for it

Totally was a BS claim to as referenced by the links offered, two at least of which were missed by midge whilst complaining those links weren't presented.

You're media bias is the only thing on display here. 

Here's the frustrating thing, psyche - your reply here demonstrates that you don't actually understand the point I was making! 

 

  

43 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Check the lawsuit by John Pope, Jr., and Zoya Code. Both racism and civil rights violations were charged. Chauvin escaped the charges.

Just seems things might be catching up with him. 

Another way of saying he "escaped the charges" is to say - he's not guilty, he's innocent, no evidence was found to support the claim made! 

Edited by Paranoid Android
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Paranoid Android said:

Can you provide a link to exactly what you are referring? I followed the case very closely as it unfolded (I watched live streams of the trial on more than one occasion) but I don't recall the details of what you refer. 

 

 

I demonstrated as much back in post #146.  You ignored it then and have ignored it since.

PS.

This is probably superfluous since you stated you "followed the case very closely".  But, I am doubtful about the ability to watch a livestream more than once.

Quote

State of Minnesota, Plaintiff, Vs. Derek Michael Chauvin
Court File No. 27-CR-20-12646

DEFENDANT’S MOTIONS FOR MITIGATED DEPARTURE AND SENTENCING MEMORANDUM

...

Mr. Chauvin asks the Court to look beyond its findings, to his background, his lack of criminal history, his amenability to probation, to the unusual facts of this case, and to his being a product of a “broken” system. ...

 https://www.mncourts.gov/mncourtsgov/media/High-Profile-Cases/27-CR-20-12646/Memorandum06022021.pdf

Edited by Golden Duck
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
1 hour ago, Paranoid Android said:

Here's the frustrating thing, psyche - your reply here demonstrates that you don't actually understand the point I was making! 

As far as I understand you are attempting to make two points.

One, that the headlines don't scream Biden Speech motivates democrat to murder

And

You think mainstream media is hiding things and covering them up. I assume you think they do this because they are covering up for democrats.

Stop beating about the bush. That's it yeah? 

1 hour ago, Paranoid Android said:

  Another way of saying he "escaped the charges" is to say - he's not guilty, he's innocent, no evidence was found to support the claim made! 

He didn't escape anything. Pope was "the 2017" unrelated case which he was charged with. Zoey's case is back in court as of May this year I believe.

 

2 hours ago, Paranoid Android said:

Derek Chauvin had no such history on his social media, he had no affiliation with any racist groups. He was just a white police officer who put his knees on the neck of a black suspect, and then the media just made a bunch of assumptions that racism was a defining reason for what happened

Ms. Code’s case was one of six arrests as far back as 2015 that the Minnesota Attorney General’s office sought to introduce, arguing that they showed how Mr. Chauvin was using excessive force when he restrained people — by their necks or by kneeling on top of them — just as he did in arresting Mr. Floyd. Police records show that Mr. Chauvin was never formally reprimanded for any of these incidents, even though at least two of those arrested said they had filed formal complaints.

Of the six people arrested, two were Black, one was Latino and one was Native American. The race of two others was not included in the arrest reports that reporters examined.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2021/02/02/us/derek-chauvin-george-floyd-past-cases.amp.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, psyche101 said:

As far as I understand you are attempting to make two points.

One, that the headlines don't scream Biden Speech motivates democrat to murder

And

You think mainstream media is hiding things and covering them up. I assume you think they do this because they are covering up for democrats.

Stop beating about the bush. That's it yeah? 

Incorrect. Those are some of the points I am making. However, the part you are missing is that when I said the mainstream media is "totally ignoring it or making excuses for it" I was clearly using that in comparison to other stories that are amplified while this was ignored. I did use the word "totally" and that opened the door for you to misunderstand me, but the word wasn't as important to my point as you have turned it into.

Do you know what hyperbole is? It is exaggeration used to make a point. I often forget that hyperbole doesn't translate well to written language, so when I write "totally ignoring it", it's hyperbolic, intended to convey the point that "hey, if the politics in this story were in reverse we'd be seeing front page news articles, we'd be seeing talking heads hosting segments for hours, we'd be seeing prime time presidential speeches, we'd be seeing riots marching for justice". The word "totally", despite its literal meaning in English was not used to suggest that there were zero articles written. It was designed to convey that the media is hiding the story and amplifying other stories instead.  

By zoning in on my hyperbolic language you have unintentionally misrepresented my position. I get that it's partly my own fault for forgetting how hyperbole doesn't translate, but I've said it a few times AND there's also the involvement of Tiny Ron in this thread who has basically said the exact same thing that I have - eg, "you're right, this story got exactly the same media coverage as the 2020 BLM riots" (not word-for-word quote, I don't recall the exact quote, but that was the sentiment). I don't necessarily agree that the riots are the best story to compare to, but the sentiment is the same - the coverage is miniscule compared to that which they would do if the politics in the story were reversed. Finding one story buried deep on the website of a mainstream outlet is nothing compared to dozens of articles written by the same organisation if the story were reversed, and it doesn't somehow refute any of the points I was raising. 

 

21 hours ago, psyche101 said:

He didn't escape anything. Pope was "the 2017" unrelated case which he was charged with. Zoey's case is back in court as of May this year I believe.

My mistake, I must have misunderstood you. Can you clarify what you meant, I'll quote your post again for reference: 

  

23 hours ago, psyche101 said:

Check the lawsuit by John Pope, Jr., and Zoya Code. Both racism and civil rights violations were charged. Chauvin escaped the charges.

Just seems things might be catching up with him. 

Please explain what you meant by "Chauvin escaped the charges" when in response to that your comment was "he didn't escape anything"?!?!?!? He either did or he didn't as far as I can tell! 

 

21 hours ago, psyche101 said:

Ms. Code’s case was one of six arrests as far back as 2015 that the Minnesota Attorney General’s office sought to introduce, arguing that they showed how Mr. Chauvin was using excessive force when he restrained people — by their necks or by kneeling on top of them — just as he did in arresting Mr. Floyd. Police records show that Mr. Chauvin was never formally reprimanded for any of these incidents, even though at least two of those arrested said they had filed formal complaints.

Of the six people arrested, two were Black, one was Latino and one was Native American. The race of two others was not included in the arrest reports that reporters examined.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2021/02/02/us/derek-chauvin-george-floyd-past-cases.amp.html

Which part of this demonstrates Chauvin was racist? It only demonstrates that he had a history of treating suspects poorly. At least six other times in his career. Two blacks, a Latino, a Native American, and presumably two white folks. Demonstrates that he should never have been a cop. Doesn't demonstrate that he's racist! 

Edited by Paranoid Android
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Golden Duck said:

I demonstrated as much back in post #146.  You ignored it then and have ignored it since.

PS.

This is probably superfluous since you stated you "followed the case very closely".  But, I am doubtful about the ability to watch a livestream more than once.

 https://www.mncourts.gov/mncourtsgov/media/High-Profile-Cases/27-CR-20-12646/Memorandum06022021.pdf

I don't read every link I come across, apologies for missing it. 

That said, the story is not quite as clear as you made it out to be. You are talking about his SENTENCING, not his trial. At his sentencing he was already found guilty, and his lawyers were doing everything they possibly could to limit the damage. He didn't plead guilty, he pled not guilty and only cited the investigation in the hopes of earning a reprieve after the case was over. You're claiming this as evidence, yet the truth is if his lawyers DIDN'T argue this, they would have been incompetent! It explains why I hadn't heard of it before, despite watching the trial very closely. 

The investigation into the Minnesota Police was not an investigation into Derek Chauvin. It was a political investigation made after the death of George Floyd. And there was only "probable cause" found, it doesn't appear as if it was an investigation that proved anything to a legally binding level. But if there are racist laws on the books in Minnesota I hope that they can be located and removed. Racism should not play any part in the world we live in, in my opinion.

On a final note, this report came out in April 2022. Wasn't this discussion sparked by the argument that people should "wait and see" before making assumptions in media stories? By that logic, the media should only have reported on this racism issue from April this year onwards. Yet here we are in a thread about a guy who literally said "I ran him over because he belonged to a Republican extremist group and I was afraid", and we need to "wait and see" for the evidence!?!?!?!? Ridiculous! 

Edited by Paranoid Android
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Paranoid Android said:

I don't read every link I come across, apologies for missing it. 

That said, the story is not quite as clear as you made it out to be. You are talking about his SENTENCING, not his trial. At his sentencing he was already found guilty, and his lawyers were doing everything they possibly could to limit the damage. He didn't plead guilty, he pled not guilty and only cited the investigation in the hopes of earning a reprieve after the case was over. You're claiming this as evidence, yet the truth is if his lawyers DIDN'T argue this, they would have been incompetent! 

The investigation into the Minnesota Police was not an investigation into Derek Chauvin. It was a political investigation made after the death of George Floyd. And there was only "probable cause" found, it doesn't appear as if it was an investigation that proved anything to a legally binding level. But if there are racist laws on the books in Minnesota I hope that they can be located and removed. Racism should not play any part in the world we live in, in my opinion.

On a final note, this report came out in April 2022. Wasn't this discussion sparked by the argument that people should "wait and see" before making assumptions in media stories? By that logic, the media should only have reported on this racism issue from April this year onwards. Yet here we are in a thread about a guy who literally said "I ran him over because he belonged to a Republican extremist group and I was afraid", and we need to "wait and see" for the evidence!?!?!?!? Ridiculous! 

Again you didn't follow the proceedings against Chauvin as thoroughly as you imagine.

Quote

On December 15, 2021, the defendant, former Minneapolis Police Department (“MPD”) officer Derek Chauvin, pleaded guilty to two violations of 18 U.S.C. § 242 pursuant to an agreement under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(c)(1)(C).

https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/us-chauvin-govt-sentencing-memo.pdf

In summary the records Chauvin admits he displayed an cold-blooded disregard for a human beings and he is the product of a broken system.  The broken systems displays a culture of racial discrimination.  The state authorities conducted investigation. The state authorities acknowledge the findings. A reasonable apprehension of racism exists.

Now lets look at what you are effectively claiming.  What Chauvin said in court, before a judge, with the assistance of a licensed legal practitioner, is something that he really didn't mean and only served a purpose to avoid sanction.

Yet a drunken nutcase collides with a pedestrian, breaks the law by leaving the scene, returns to call State Radio and is entirely genuine and accurate in his report; and, served no intention of earning a reprieve.

Murdoch media isn't doctrine.  You don't have to treat it that way.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

Again you didn't follow the proceedings against Chauvin as thoroughly as you imagine.

https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/us-chauvin-govt-sentencing-memo.pdf

In summary the records Chauvin admits he displayed an cold-blooded disregard for a human beings and he is the product of a broken system.  The broken systems displays a culture of racial discrimination.  The state authorities conducted investigation. The state authorities acknowledge the findings. A reasonable apprehension of racism exists.

Now lets look at what you are effectively claiming.  What Chauvin said in court, before a judge, with the assistance of a licensed legal practitioner, is something that he really didn't mean and only served a purpose to avoid sanction.

Yet a drunken nutcase collides with a pedestrian, breaks the law by leaving the scene, returns to call State Radio and is entirely genuine and accurate in his report; and, served no intention of earning a reprieve.

Murdoch media isn't doctrine.  You don't have to treat it that way.

I followed the trial very closely and very thoroughly! Up until the trial ended in April 2021 with Chauvin being found guilty (it was to that which I was referring to when saying he pleaded Not Guilty)! I have not followed the case since then, I only have limited time to do all the things in life I want to do and it just wasn't a priority. Your article is dated December 2021, so forgive me that my information is out of date. I will have to read up on this (it will take time, if I can manage to find said time).

Maybe pleading guilty was easier than fighting the charges, especially if he made a deal allowing him to serve the sentence at the same time, meaning no additional time in prison - though he's going to spend enough time in there, even laying aside the murder conviction there's still the matter of his tax fraud charges which he is looking at many years behind bars for those crimes alone. Last I heard he'd pled Not Guilty to those charges, but haven't really followed it more than that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Paranoid Android said:

I followed the trial very closely and very thoroughly! Up until the trial ended in April 2021 with Chauvin being found guilty (it was to that which I was referring to when saying he pleaded Not Guilty)! I have not followed the case since then, I only have limited time to do all the things in life I want to do and it just wasn't a priority. Your article is dated December 2021, so forgive me that my information is out of date. I will have to read up on this (it will take time, if I can manage to find said time).

Maybe pleading guilty was easier than fighting the charges, especially if he made a deal allowing him to serve the sentence at the same time, meaning no additional time in prison - though he's going to spend enough time in there, even laying aside the murder conviction there's still the matter of his tax fraud charges which he is looking at many years behind bars for those crimes alone. Last I heard he'd pled Not Guilty to those charges, but haven't really followed it more than that. 

There's no need for forgiveness.  You made a claim for rhetorical purposes.  I gave reason to dismiss that claim.

You will hopefully notice I have, as much as practicable, avoided media coverage and provided sources direct from authorities.  You've characterised the MDHR investigation as political - asserting an apprehension of bias.  I expect you are aware there is little room for a government employee to operate outside the scope of legislation when decisions are public and open for independent review.

Ultimately I see your judgment in the juxtaposition of the Chauvin and Brandt cases as inconsistent.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.