UNDlaw80
-
Posts
1,011 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
12
Posts posted by UNDlaw80
-
-
5 minutes ago, SIOUXFAN97 said:
where's the bruise then?
I already detailed why no bruising existed.......as detailed by medical experts during the trial, with really no counterpoints from the defense.
-
1 hour ago, SIOUXFAN97 said:
so your saying his knee wasn't on his neck....so manslaughter it is then.
His knee was on both. That’s painfully obvious.
No sane person continues to kneel on somebody’s neck/shoulders (for 4-5 minutes) well after the person has lost consciousness, stopped breathing and has no pulse. Said action can only lead to 1 outcome – death. Holy hell, he didn't even get off when paramedics arrived. That doesn’t even happen in bar fights. It shows blatant intent to kill.
That's why he was convicted of murder, not manslaughter.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, SIOUXFAN97 said:
doesn't no bruising prove that the knee was on the shoulders? or just because the media reminds you everyday of "9 minutes of knee on NECK" you can't figure it out...no bruise no murder?
This isn’t difficult. Floyd wasn’t "strangled" per se, but (in layman's terms) died of positional asphyxiation. This is what the vast majority of medical experts concluded, and why the 9 minutes of Chauvin on top of him played a huge part.
Basically, for 9 minutes Floyd was put in a prone position that made it difficult to expand the chest cavity to obtain air. And, in addition, had the full weight of a grown man pressing down on his neck/shoulder for said time frame further exacerbating his inability to obtain oxygen.
His positioning and Chauvin’s weight and unwillingness to get off of him is what killed him. It explains the lack of bruising considering Chauvin’s force was static.
-
2 minutes ago, Redneksioux said:
With the amount of video they replayed, blatantly showing the officers not "protecting and serving" I think they shot themselves in the foot. I think their only hope would have been to allow Chauvin to testify to possibly humanize him some.
Every competent lawyer considers as such.
So it’s actually telling that the defense decided not to allow Chauvin to testify considering their chances for acquittal already looked exceedingly slim. What’s there to lose?
That tells me Chauvin had no answer for his actions, and/or was unapologetic (difficult to humanize him to the jury).
His lawyers weren't stupid .-
1
-
-
15 minutes ago, Redneksioux said:
https://www.newsweek.com/george-floyd-autopsy-report-cause-death-1579393
quoted from link...
According to the report, Floyd, who had been apprehended on suspicion of passing a counterfeit $20 bill, died of "cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression."
My opinion, since the officers did the opposite of the "protecting and serving" here, and the defense was almost incompetent, this was a no brainer for the jurors.
Chauvin’s defense team was actually quite good. They managed to muddy the waters somewhat, but, ultimately, had very little to work with.
The few experts they brought in to testify completely folded under cross examination. -
1 hour ago, petey23 said:
Interesting. Do you have a link?
There were 2 independent autopsies performed; both agreed the manner of death was homicide.
Both examiners testified during the trial.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/7317557002
-
Jared Moe goes to Wisconsin.
-
If Scheel goes, Berry and co will be scouring the transfer portal. I’d think Galajda would be their #1 target.
-
I'm not even all that upset. The boys left it all on the ice. Can't ask for anything more. We're better than Duluth but sometimes **** happens in single elimination. It is what it is.
-
2
-
-
My goodness, Weatherby and B-D sure did trigger an avalanche of snowflakes.
-
3
-
1
-
-
26 minutes ago, Stockdamhockey said:
Many (not all) standout athletes, particularly DI athletes, are pampered. They live in a world quite different from us "average Joes" and always have. Good for them. They are talented in a way that most of us will never experience. We enjoy watching their talent. But because of their talent, those around them have idolized them, giving them every advantage. Their self-importance grows. There is no better representation of this privilege than when we have to hear college athletes who are wearing state-funded uniforms, practicing and playing in benefactor-funded facilities, eating chef-prepared meals, receiving full-ride private/state funded scholarships while representing a state university --- say "we have a platform, and its our right to raise awareness for our cause via that platform...." No son, you're floating on a platform someone built for you. You're a beneficiary, and you're representing the builders.
Do they have the right to kneel during the Anthem? Of course, this is America. Should they. Not in my opinion. When you are representing the University of North Dakota, respect the flag.
When you are on your own time - like marching in the Floyd Rally - by all means, do your thing.
Generally speaking this is true in hockey. But for football and basketball? No way. Tons of those kids come from environments well below "average joe" standards.
-
35 minutes ago, snooty89 said:
Those that are complaining that we don't like them kneeling during the anthem are doing the exact same thing we are doing. We don't like them kneeling or locking arms and are saying so. They are saying they don't like us questioning the players actions and supporting them. Apparently it's ok to support them, but heaven forbid we question misguided college students.
Complain all you want. But it seems like most people are inquiring into why this is such a big deal. I mean our fanbase been disrespecting the anthem for 40 years now.
Btw, the PC and cancel culture is in regards to those posts advocating to limit what these players do, or (like a previous post) advocating violence.
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, Oxbow6 said:
That's rich comng from you but carry on.
No need to get personal, this isn't the dumsterfire. Leave that there.
Either way, you have me mixed up with someone else. I'm not a fan of PC culture at all. There still exists people who think for themselves nowadays and aren't part of a 'political team'.
-
1
-
-
19 minutes ago, cowboys5xsbs said:
I support the kneeling players and our team will lock arms and support them too. Its ridiculous that people still get upset over something that hurts noone.
It's called political correctness, cancel culture, etc.
-
3 minutes ago, tnt said:
The flag and anthem are two different things. I didn't pledge allegiance to the anthem in grade school.
They're the same thing. They're symbols.
And no, you didn't innately pledge allegiance to a piece of dye colored cloth. Your life will continue unabated if that cloth goes up in flames. You pledged allegiance to what it stands for. What the flag represents is what's precious, not the flag itself.
-
1
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
Sounds as if people's disapproval is misplaced.
If innately disrespecting the anthem was so offensive, why has our fanbase continually yelled “Sioux” at the end it with absolutely no repercussions? It’s the same thing. People are making a statement at the expense of the anthem.
If it's an issue of politics, just say so. Don't butter it up with the anthem disrespect stuff that our fanbase has been engaged in for 40+ years now. Then again, if you don't want politics in sport, perhaps we shouldn't play the anthem at all.
-
6
-
1
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
All this outrage over anthem kneeling is another example of political correctness running amok.
As long as they’re not hurting anybody, or infringing on others’ rights, who cares if someone kneels during the anthem. It’s not like doing as such is giving you people cancer.
Deal with it. Or learn something from it.Anyhow, according to the article, the rest of the team will be locking arms during the anthem in support of the kneeling players and racial justice. That’s great to hear. Great for team unity.
-
1
-
14
-
2
-
2 hours ago, Nodak78 said:
Need to check the machine software. That is where it is stolen and that is just starting.
I read Powell's complaint. Her case will fall apart under answer/cross, easily. Just like the rest the frivolous election litigation
Notice how her ‘smoking gun’ is nowhere in her legal complaint. Surely you remember the servers seized from Germany, right? Powell was crowing about that for weeks and you people were frothing at the mouth. You're getting played, ace.
As long as Trump/lawyers are able to line their pockets with donations, a new conspiracy will always be around the corner.
Perhaps your time would be better spent figuring this one out.
-
2
-
-
8 hours ago, Nodak78 said:
Reasons why the 2020 presidential election is deeply puzzling | Spectator USA
The following peculiarities also lack compelling explanations:
1. Late on election night, with Trump comfortably ahead, many swing states stopped counting ballots. In most cases, observers were removed from the counting facilities. Counting generally continued without the observers
2. Statistically abnormal vote counts were the new normal when counting resumed. They were unusually large in size (hundreds of thousands) and had an unusually high (90 percent and above) Biden-to-Trump ratio
3. Late arriving ballots were counted. In Pennsylvania, 23,000 absentee ballots have impossible postal return dates and another 86,000 have such extraordinary return dates they raise serious questions
4. The failure to match signatures on mail-in ballots. The destruction of mail in ballot envelopes, which must contain signatures
5. Historically low absentee ballot rejection rates despite the massive expansion of mail voting. Such is Biden’s narrow margin that, as political analyst Robert Barnes observes, ‘If the states simply imposed the same absentee ballot rejection rate as recent cycles, then Trump wins the election’
6. Missing votes. In Delaware County, Pennsylvania, 50,000 votes held on 47 USB cards are missing
7. Non-resident voters. Matt Braynard’s Voter Integrity Project estimates that 20,312 people who no longer met residency requirements cast ballots in Georgia. Biden’s margin is 12,670 votes
8. Serious ‘chain of custody’ breakdowns. Invalid residential addresses. Record numbers of dead people voting. Ballots in pristine condition without creases, that is, they had not been mailed in envelopes as required by law
9. Statistical anomalies. In Georgia, Biden overtook Trump with 89 percent of the votes counted. For the next 53 batches of votes counted, Biden led Trump by the same exact 50.05 to 49.95 percent margin in every single batch. It is particularly perplexing that all statistical anomalies and tabulation abnormalities were in Biden’s favor. Whether the cause was simple human error or nefarious activity, or a combination, clearly something peculiar happened.
If you think that only weirdos have legitimate concerns about these findings and claims, maybe the weirdness lies in you.
If what you posted WAS legitimate, Republican judges would be jumping all over it; at every level. Yet here we sit with Trump at 1-39 in litigation. Think about that for a second. Right-leaning judges aren’t gonna rule for him in bad faith. If a concern exists, objectively investigate and analyze the data with reason and rationality. Then present a compelling case for it. Unfortunately Trump's ‘evidence’ (what you posted) isn’t evidence, it’s political skullduggery innuendo not rooted in realism. I mean it took me 3 seconds to find out #1 is false.
And yes, some on this board are political weirdos. Reality didn’t turn out as they expected, so they’re rejecting reality.
-
1
-
1
-
-
45 minutes ago, homer said:
I don’t necessarily dismiss his behavior. Your point though if 40% of the country believing the election was rigged is identical to 4 years of Dems crying about Russia and leading investigations. The crying came from top officials which is not a whole lot different than this election. Equally as damaging.
It’s not the same. Trump is undermining the integrity and public trust in our innate voting process for political gain. The Dems never went this far; at least not to Trump’s 24/7 level. The Dems asserted Russia interfered via hacking and social media to alter opinion. Big difference.
Foreign influence can always be mitigated. The fact that Trump is throwing everything at the wall (no matter how absurd), everywhere, to undermine the sanctity of our innate voting mechanisms will likely have far reaching consequences when all this is finished.
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, JohnboyND7 said:
Well it made sense that Biden would pick up some of the voters who might identify as moderates who don't like Trump. Biden is also a much more likable person than Hillary, some who stayed home as a protest may have come out this time too.
Trump is polarizing, that probably drove some turnout too.
1 hour ago, Bison06 said:I agree and understand that assessment, but with how poorly Biden performed in traditional Democratic strongholds, it just seems unlikely for him to then have had a record amount of votes. Higher voter turnout, I get it, but you’d think the ratios for certain areas would have been more consistent than they were.
56 minutes ago, The Sicatoka said:Only doing better in four key urban centers is most curious of a result. And just the right four no less. Such good fortune for Mister Biden.
First, accurate information is needed before any analysis can be done. It took a 5 second google search to find out that "Biden underperformed Clinton everywhere except Milwaukee, Detroit, Atlanta and Philly" it patently false.
The info stemmed from Townhall. Erika Haas, a spokesperson for Townhall Media, told USA TODAY its story “jumped the gun” and has since been corrected.
EDIT: Biden did better than Hillary in most major metro areas. This is easily verifiable with info obtained by state/county election websites, if you care to compare that to Hillary's results. Cmon people, let's not be sheep here.
-
4
-
-
53 minutes ago, Bison06 said:
Fair enough, that makes sense. What is your take on the article posted pointing out all the historically unique voting trends that took place in order for Biden to win. I’m not claiming they point to fraud, just more evidence of how odd this election was in comparison to history.
It's certainly unique. But it fits in with this entire election cycle being nuts; in addition to Covid, race riots, economic hardship, an exceedingly divided citizenry, etc.
I mean 4 years ago Trump shocked the world, unprecedently. But, in the following years, we made sense of why this occurred by actually embracing and studying anomalies. The same will occur with 2020's results. And we'll have a understanding of America because of it.
If my opinion counts for anything, I think many of these anomalies stem from high turnout. Non-politically minded individuals, traditional non-voters and high minority turnout had a great affect on altering traditional voting demographics.
-
4
-
-
31 minutes ago, JohnboyND7 said:
Yeah I would think the goal would be to highlight the cases benefitting my argument.
Oddly enough, the whole liberal talking point of "Trump's judicial nominees are awful and unqualified and biased" seems to be getting #rekt lol
For sure, the Dems played ridiculous politics with Trump appointees. It was laughable.
That said, every judge has a bias. But this bias reveals itself when actual evidence (or solid arguments) are presented. Few judges, no matter how biased, are gonna give Trump the time of day with the arguments he's presenting. It's why he's something like 1-40 in post election litigation.
SCOTUS will act no differently. Just because it's Right-leaning does not mean they're so partial they'll overrule decisions based on such laughable arguments. I mean you actually need to make a case to SCOTUS.
-
2 hours ago, SiouxFan100 said:
From raw story today.
“In a ruling released on Friday, United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit Judge Stephanos Bibas shot down the campaign’s appeal of its Pennsylvania lawsuit seeking to nullify the state’s entire election results.
In his ruling, Bibas chastised the Trump campaign not only for failing to present evidence, but for failing to even make specific allegations of voter fraud.
“Free, fair elections are the lifeblood of our democracy,” Bibas wrote. “Charges of unfairness are serious. But calling an election unfair does not make it so. Charges require specific allegations and then proof. We have neither here.”
“Free, fair elections are the lifeblood of our democracy,” Bibas wrote. “Charges of unfairness are serious. But calling an election unfair does not make it so. Charges require specific allegations and then proof. We have neither here.”
Today's ruling came from a Trump appointed judge. A Federalist Society member of all things.
His quote illustrates Trumps legal challenges thus far to a T.
-
1
-
Crime and Punishment
in Community
Posted
Ok Chief. Like I said, Chauvin's position was static. No blunt force or significant movement of Chauvin's knee was applied - he applied even force and pressure. Not uncommon for non-bruising to occur. This is basic medical stuff.
“This myth that you have to have bruises to prove strangulation, no you don’t. You can be strangled to death and have no bruises,” Dr Smock said, using his hands to demonstrate how someone chocked in a headlock might not get bruises because limbs are broad surfaces, while someone strangled with a thin cord might have acute marks to show for it.
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/george-floyd-died-because-had-222628629.html