SIGN UP

Chauvin's History

Avatar Image
pixie374 | 11:40 Fri 30th Apr 2021 | News
55 Answers
I don't think I've seen anything further about him here. But it was interesting that on AB, the past of the victim seemed more important than the past of the perpetrator..

With 18 complaints plus disciplinaries for violent behaviour behind him.... has anyone changed their mind (or willing to admit) that if you give a violent control freak too much power, they will abuse it?

https://www-independent-co-uk.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/george-floyd-death-derek-chauvin-case-b1725071.html?amp=&amp_gsa=1&amp_js_v=a6&usqp=mq331AQHKAFQArABIA%3D%3D#amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&aoh=16197785913388&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.independent.co.uk%2Fnews%2Fworld%2Famericas%2Fgeorge-floyd-death-derek-chauvin-case-b1725071.html

Answers

1 to 20 of 55rss feed

1 2 3 Next Last

Avatar Image
I maintain my earlier point, a handcuffed man cannot easily get to his feet, much less start causing trouble - as much trouble as you can cause without use of your hands - without being easily restrained. Had Mr Floyd managed to get up - and give it a try, just lie down, lace your fingers together behind your back and see how easy it isn't to get to your feet - any one of...
16:29 Fri 30th Apr 2021
-- answer removed --
He should have been sacked years ago. He's a bully with a badge.
He should have been fired
In all these things you usually take the case on its facts

there is now bad character evidence which is allowed in english law under strict cricumstances
thre is also the similar evidence rule where you make up evidence because he did exactly that 2 y ago and so .....


In the Ebola GMC case - I was told - oh they will have to find the doctor guilty of spreading ebola because they did that to the nurse and it wouldnt be fair to screw one and not the other

and I said - excuse me what did you just say?

and yes Paul Cosford of the PHE you knew neither were guilty because it was one of your employees wasnt it? this came out in the oral testimony under oath at the GMC
I was aware of his past behaviour. Quite honestly I saw no point in informing AB. Many abers are quite happy to blame the man who was murdered. Will this information change minds. .? I doubt it ( sadly ) .
Dixon of Dock Green would have been found guilty in that court.
When's the appeal, anyone know?
'has anyone changed their mind (or willing to admit) that if you give a violent control freak too much power, they will abuse it?'

No.

Do you have a link to Chauvin's 18 complaints?
Question Author
Thanks all. Anne, I did know, but not many specifics beforehand, let alone that he had done exactly the same thing previously on a child.
Tbh, I don't expect anyone to
even admit they changed their minds on here. I was just interested in how people judged character really.
You can find it from whichever source you like, zacs now, but this is one
https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/01/us/derek-chauvin-what-we-know-trnd/index.html
And thanks, spice- didn't help that most of the world actually saw him do it. No.
'he had done exactly the same thing previously on a child'

Well, not exactly. The child didn't die which a decent Barrister may have argued enhanced the argument that Floyd's drug habit may have contributed to his death.

As someone else has already stated, the Guilty verdict was a foregone conclusion.
Question Author
It was foregone, as it was obvious. The child didn't die, no, but the behaviour was the same. Wouldn't you see that as a warning? Or at least, wouldn't most people?
Question Author
//has anyone changed their mind (or willing to admit) that if you give a violent control freak too much power, they will abuse it?'

No.//

Probably, enough said!
I've no idea of the force necessary to restrain people and neither do you, Pix. All you're doing here is saying 'see, I was right' but there's no way of us digging into the facts to prove it either way. But if it makes you feel good trying, you crack on.
I said 'No' for exactly the same reason. You can opine that one thing leads to the other but you have a) no proof Chauvin was a violent control freak' or b)that giving one (a VCF) too much power they will abuse it.

Again, they are merely your unprovable conclusions in an effort to prove you were right.
Dixon of Dock Green's already in jail for belonging to a neo-Nazi terror group

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-56941544
Question Author
Not really, zacs. It's nothing to do with being right- the majority of people saw the same thing... and I suspect the majority also know you need very little force to control an unconscious man.
Pretty sure you can't bring a defendant's past history into play in any trial, girls, keen as you are/were to do so.
On the other hand, George's previous drug use, interaction with the police, etc were crucial to the trial.
So while you'd like to think that anyone who didn't want Chauvin lynched must be institutionally racist. Some of us just like to see fair play.
Nope, not changed my mind.
Question Author
Spice, there is nothing to prove it was racist. Personally, I'm not sure at all. We only know he was an aggressive bully.
His previous history didn't come into it, so why would the victim's? Surely that's less relevant, not more?
Non.
'you need very little force to control an unconscious man.'

Floyd was never unconscious.

1 to 20 of 55rss feed

1 2 3 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Chauvin's History

Answer Question >>