<---I AM NOT A LAWYER -- THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE ---> agree or disagree isnt an issue, this is the way it works as I understand it.
after he is found not guilty, or some other verdict that clears him, he cant be charged again with the same offense.
Chauvin is charged with 3 distinct offenses for the same crime. Being charged with multiple violations of law for the same crime is quite common in our criminal justice system, from things like the local traffic level on up to the federal murders.
You can be charged with breaking multiple laws, and in situations like this one, only the highest will apply as they are all for the responsibility of this individuals death. Had he been charged with something else along the way, say some other infraction at the event that was not part of the death, but was still part of the event itself, thye could find guilty on that and add to the sentence for the death charge.
as @lawfag stated. Sp they can be sure to get a conviction on at least some level for the responsibility of the death.
Oh I understand how it's argued for. That doesn't mean it isn't unconstitutional as fuck. He can only be charged with one offense for one crime. If the crime is actually 2 different things, then charge him as such. But it's not. Murder 2 and Murder 3 are the same thing for the same crime. To argue otherwise is pure kikery, wrong, and fucking retarded. You are fully controlled if you believe it's okay he was charged this way, let alone at all.
Not sure if you remember the Casey Anthony case- but the prosecution fucked up by charging her for murder 1 and child abandonment, when they should have charged for 1, 2, and manslaughter.
She got off because the prosecution couldn't prove murder 1. As in, she planned it and executed it. They did convict her on being a shitty mother though, but she got off with time served.
had they charged her with 2 and manslaughter as well, she'd probably be in jail right now.
some murder charges don't require planning and malice
Murder requires malice aforethought. Which is malicious planning and intent. I fucking hate jew law. I hate how lawyers push jew law as meaningful, real, or as points of evidence against the fucking constitution because "hey goy that's how things are done!!!" You will never be right here. That may be how things happen, but I'm not disagreeing with that. I'm stating that it's unconstitutional to charge someone with 3 identical charges because they're ever so slightly different.
(post is archived)