They are not acts exclusive of each other; read how the laws are written/paraphrased and you will see how this works.
So for someone who knows pretty much nothing about law, I am curious how being guilty of all 3 charges makes sense? How can you commit 2nd degree murder and manslaughter at the same time? Not that I disagree with the verdicts, just curious how that is logically possible.
Finally an outcome that makes sense, good riddance to a horrible cop. lmportant also to give massive kudos the LEOs who didn't lie for Chauvin. May this give others resolve.
I'm sure it will be appealed, but I don't care. All three. Good.
I think you got too much baggage going on here. This case here in no way had any basis in racial issues except for the race baiters and those that want it to be. The case highlights that cops continuing to use force past when a person has gone unresponsive is going to be found guilty under the law of a crime.
I really do not know. I was born in the last year of the Boomers, so I've got some of that sub-conscious tinge of racism bit even though I was born in the North East (well, plus some influence from the Neo Nazi father of my first serious girl friend, sorry, but she was really hot ). Anyway, I'm aware of it now so if I notice I'm feeling that way I turn it off easily. I don't know why some people can't turn it off. My dad wouldn't put up with any racist noise, so maybe that's the difference? I just hope that we are turning a corner with the younger generations - especially millennials and younger. Change in deeply entrenched social conditions like racism seem exasperatingly resistant to change. This is a great day - we just need hundreds more like it for real change to start to stick.My question, why did it take so much effort to get what should been a simple case? Millions of white people had to march along with black people around the world just to force the right thing.
Yes and no. The 2DM statute in Minnesota is a bit strange. The issue is that Chauvin's continued use of force past when Floyd passed out was excessive force. That makes is an assault and one he was intentionally doing. I think the prosecution did a poor job of highlighting it, but the jury got it regardless. Chauvin's continued use of restraint, even if Floyd is dead at that point, is felony assault or attempted felony assault (attempted in the case Floyd died at that point when going unresponsive). 2DM in Minnesota is basically felony murder anywhere else and thus the outcome.
So for someone who knows pretty much nothing about law, I am curious how being guilty of all 3 charges makes sense? How can you commit 2nd degree murder and manslaughter at the same time? Not that I disagree with the verdict, just curious how that is logically possible.
Because the conditions that need to be met are different for each defined transgression, simple as that.So for someone who knows pretty much nothing about law, I am curious how being guilty of all 3 charges makes sense? How can you commit 2nd degree murder and manslaughter at the same time? Not that I disagree with the verdict, just curious how that is logically possible.
I think you got too much baggage going on here. This case here in no way had any basis in racial issues except for the race baiters and those that want it to be. The case highlights that cops continuing to use force past when a person has gone unresponsive is going to be found guilty under the law of a crime.
Yeah, it's being called "felony murder" by some commentators but it differs considerably from felony murder in other states. That is because Minnesota doesn't apply the merger doctrine, whereby an assault cannot be the predicate felony under the rule. That is because the elements of assault are also elements of murder, so every killing would be "felony murder." In other states, If the underlying crime is an assault, then the prosecution either has to prove intent to kill, which is 1DM, or else a reckless or negligent homicide.
MN's 2DM statute is really just a general intent version of 1DM, whereby you meant to do harm but not to kill, and you killed anyway. It's really more analogous to that than it is to felony murder, though I understand why some people are making the comparison.
Anyone got a link to the look on his face when the verdict came in? Should have taken a plea deal instead of putting the nation through all this but I expect nothing less from someone who clearly enjoyed his power trip.
Usually there is a bubble up, as I mentioned earlier, but there still has to be a clear delineation. The issue is that manslaughter and 2DM in Minnesota are basically the same statute. That is where there is a grounds for a legislative appeal to the 2DM being valid. By SCOTUS rulings in the past, if two statutes are exactly (or functionally) the same, then only the one with the lesser penalty applies. Chauvin and his attorney I believe have a case challenging the legislative legitimacy of the 2DM here.
Actually, I'm glad he didn't. I think that we, as a country, needed this to happen. We needed a new precedent that was very public, IMHO.Anyone got a link to the look on his face when the verdict came in? Should have taken a plea deal instead of putting the nation through all this but I expect nothing less from someone who clearly enjoyed his power trip.
Uh, no, they're not. 2DM requires an underlying felony. Manslaughter requires no such thing. Drive drunk and run someone over, your underlying offense is misdemeanor DUI. That will get you manslaughter. Might even get you 3DM. 2DM is an intentional act which is also a felony, with an unintended death. Big difference.
Anyone got a link to the look on his face when the verdict came in? Should have taken a plea deal instead of putting the nation through all this but I expect nothing less from someone who clearly enjoyed his power trip.
Yep, that is correct. It is also a wonder it hasn't been challenged to being legit legislatively either. Maybe Chauvin and his attorney attempt to challenge that if they don't get an appeal on the prosecutorial misconduct grounds. The jury appeal grounds I think are not going to fly.
You linked to first-degree manslaughter.Not in Minnesota...manslaughter is still based upon the assault. https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.20
Not in Minnesota...manslaughter is still based upon the assault. https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.20
the police did lie about what happened at the scene:I wish to thank this person. Because without him police would have LIED about what happened at the scene...
Who invented the camera phone? It depends
Borland founder Philippe Kahn takes credit but CNET News.com's Michael Kanellos begs to differ. In this case a picture tells much less than a thousand words.www.cnet.com
manslaughter is a lesser included offense of murder 3 (that is, if the requirements of murder 3 are X and Y, you've also met all the requirements for manslaughter which is just X) and murder 3 is a lesser included offense of murder 2 (which would be X and Y and Z here).So for someone who knows pretty much nothing about law, I am curious how being guilty of all 3 charges makes sense? How can you commit 2nd degree murder and manslaughter at the same time? Not that I disagree with the verdict, just curious how that is logically possible.
There are five separate grounds laid out there. None requires assault. None requires a felony. One requires a misdemeanor which could be an assault.
Other grounds also exist as second degree manslaughter.
Look at what it took just to get this far. The bar to get justice for black people is too high but maybe has gotten a little a lower