Back to episode — Episode 1352 Scott Adams - Chauvin Verdict and What it Means About America
Context —
a little bit for the credibility. Now, did they make a wise decision? Well, let's look at some of the outcomes. So we don't know if it's wise, but I do feel like they were credible and tried. And here's one of the outcomes. According to Axios reporting, senior Democrat and Republican aides, so both Democrats and Republicans, this is important to the story, the aides say they would have never let…
← Previous segment →ou? You could feel bad about the death without admitting guilt. Indeed you could say, "I feel terrible for the family. I feel awful about what happened. I hope that the jury will show that I wasn't a participant in that because that's what I felt at the time." Would that be incriminating to simply have empathy? Or remorse is the wrong word because remorse would suggest that he did know he did something wrong. So you'd have to be careful there. But you could have empathy, right?
And I feel that he didn't show it in a way people were expecting, which doesn't mean anything. He just didn't show it the way people expected at the moment. And I think this changed a lot of minds. Apparently there was a moment when he knew there was no heartbeat and he didn't change his behavior. If you were on top of somebody holding them down and you knew that their heart stopped beating, how does that not immediately change your behavior? And I don't think it changed his behavior.
So somebody says Asperger's. Well that would be interesting. Certainly that would be really interesting if that were even a little bit true. That would be certainly part of the defense or part of the sentencing. But I doubt it was true. We would have heard about it anyway.
So I think this jury looked at a person who had no empathy and he was close enough to doing something that looked like murder that when they looked at all of the variables, including their own safety, what it would do to society, just what feels right, I feel like the jury made the right decision.
Now is that the same as saying that the trial was fair? I don't think it was even close to fair. Not even close. But I think the jury could have a right decision without the trial being even close to fair. And that would be okay in my mind. I could hold both of those as true. But I've heard you earlier that you couldn't and that's a legitimate opinion.
Yeah, I think it was a human sacrifice. And here's something that I think that the Black population of this country doesn't fully understand. And I'm going to illustrate it by playing two parts. I will now give you a skit in which I play a representative group of Black Americans, not any specific person, and a representative person representing white people, not any one white person.
And Black people say, "Hey you white people, let's see if you can now punish a white person for doing something that you know maybe there's a little argument about how bad it was. Let's see if you can do that. Hey white people, do you think you can punish a white person?" And then the white people say, "Sure, watch this."
Then the Black people say, "I know, but can you punish an actual white person when the crime, there's some disagreement about the nature of the crime? Do you think you can do that?" And the white people say, "We just said yes. I don't even know why you're asking. Of course we can. Of course we can. We do it every day. Punishing other white people is like breathing if you're a white person. Do you know how many white people I've punished who had it coming? Lots of them. E
Context —
very day. Punishing other white people is the easiest thing we do." Let me give you a story that a lot of people didn't believe when I've been telling this story for years. It's completely true. But when I tell it there's a certain percentage of you who will swear I'm lying. Trust me, I've been saying it for I don't know, 25 years since I've been able to tell the story. And there would be literal…
Next segment → →