Video emerges of Minneapolis police killing a citizen - - Riots

[Skybird]

IT SEEMS WERE NOT THE ONLY ONES WITH A PROBLEM OVER SKIN COLOR. BUT IN AMERICA WE DON'T CARVE UP TOO MANY FOR MEDICINAL PURPOSES....YET.:shucks:
Wait until the Chinese have conquered America and bring their traditional Chinese medicine with them... :D

[Aktungbby]

THAT WILL BE THE APOTHEOSIS OF APOTHECARY INASMUCH AS WE USED SMALLPOX TO ERADICATE THE ASIATIC MIGRATORY DECENDANTS IN NORTH AMERICA PRIMARILY WITH SMALLPOX(SIR JEFFRY AMHERST WAS A WAR CRIMINAL?!!) ie:THE ONLY GOOD INDIAN IS A DEAD INDIAN-WITH APOLOGIES TO WINNETOU AND TONTO:yeah:...AND SOME 200 YEARS THE LATER, THE THE COMPLIMENT IS BEING RETURNED WITH THE CORONA VIRUS.

[Onkel Neal]

California couple charged with hate crime for allegedly vandalizing Black Lives Matter mural

https://abcnews.go.com/US/california-couple-charged-hate-crime-allegedly-vandalizing-black/story?id=71668864

But destroying a statue of Columbus or defacing a statue of Churchill, that's totally not a hate crime. Yeah. :/\\!!

[Mr Quatro]

California couple charged with hate crime for allegedly vandalizing Black Lives Matter mural

https://abcnews.go.com/US/california-couple-charged-hate-crime-allegedly-vandalizing-black/story?id=71668864

But destroying a statue of Columbus or defacing a statue of Churchill, that's totally not a hate crime. Yeah. :/\\!!

Must have been worth more than $900 that's the limit now for crime reported in the state of California for the police to respond :yep:

[August]

The same people who charge that couple claim that these are Peaceful protesters :roll:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=8&v=U1VdhQbfSTY&feature=emb_logo

[Buddahaid]

It does spoil the message. It always boils down to the stupids ruining everything righteous.

[Onkel Neal]

The same people who charge that couple claim that these are Peaceful protesters :roll:


Good video. He's right, while Chicago PD has to fight the white mobs, black people are being gunned down across the city.

[Cybermat47]

But destroying a statue of Columbus or defacing a statue of Churchill, that's totally not a hate crime. Yeah. :/\\!!

Well, Columbus and Churchill were individuals, not an ethnic group or some other kind of demographic. So unless said vandalism included something like “death to all white people”, it’s not a hate crime.

And the couple in question seem particularly stupid, saying stuff like “there is no racism. It's a leftist lie”. Because apparently every time you’ve seen someone (white, black, Chinese, or anyone else) discriminated against based on race was actually an illusion created by Stalin.

It does spoil the message. It always boils down to the stupids ruining everything righteous.

Exactly. Fighting racism is a noble goal, but destroying innocent small businesses, blocking traffic, etc. just harms that message. People won’t want to listen to you if you get them fired from their job for being late.

[Onkel Neal]

Looks like some savvy black guy has figured out these white punks are making his life harder.


For more than an hour on Thursday evening, activist Edreece Phillips, 48, a Black hip-hop artist who's been protesting for weeks, had been keeping protesters and sightseers off the fence enclosing the federal courthouse. He said he'd talked to federal officials earlier in the day and said they'd agreed that if protesters stayed back, agents would stay inside the courthouse.

“They don’t come out unless we try to get in," Phillips said. "All that stuff people are doing is making it so that Black voices are being heard less and less and less.”

At one point, Phillips warily watched as other protesters drifted closer to the federal building. He then snatched a sign from a young man and stomped on it.

"I am sick of you doing this," Phillips yelled to the protester, who was dressed in all black, goggles atop his head and a respirator dangling from his neck. "I have warned you already. I'm sick of it."

Phillips punched the protester moments later, yelling that the protester's actions would draw a violent response from federal agents inside the courthouse, weakening the protest's message.
The young man responded with some quiet words but didn't move. In reply, Phillips punched the man several times, knocking him to the ground.

Another protester, Teal Lindseth, 21, then turned on Phillips.

“Do not come out here to fight!" she screamed at him as a crowd surrounded them. "We can’t afford violence.”

The night before, small groups of white protesters aligned with Black Lives Matter had thrown water bottles at the federal court building, shot fireworks at the front doors and tried to shake the fence loose.

“A lot of the people who are doing it are not Black. They throw **** and start **** and run away and yell 'Black Lives Matter,' and then go home and take off their clothes. But I can’t take off my black," Phillips said. "And the more damage they do to this building— well, everyone thinks it’s people of color doing all this and it’s not. “

https://www.gannett-cdn.com/presto/2020/07/24/USAT/b4a51bd2-e810-49f9-9415-9e65fec0c495-XXX_TH__portland_protests_2020_482.JPG?width=300&height=364&fit=crop&format=pjpg&auto=webp
Hip-hop artist and Black Lives Matter protester Edreece Phillips, 48,
yells at a fellow protester for getting close to the security fence ringing the federal
courthouse in Portland, Oregon on July 23, 2020.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/07/24/portland-protests-violence-continues-amid-calls-for-police-reform/5499523002/

[Cybermat47]

-snip-

I saw one case of a black man being called a race traitor for carrying an American flag. Of course, all the people yelling at him were privileged white people.

It honestly seems like some people don’t care about the noble goals of stopping police brutality and making life better for black Americans, and just want to feel important. And that means that many of them will stop caring after a while, and more police brutality will occur...

Black lives matter. They matter more than some white kid’s temper tantrum.

Though of course, I doubt that most white people aligned with BLM are like this (partly because I’m a white person who strongly agrees with BLM when it comes to police brutality). The media just likes to focus on the most sensational and attention-grabbing stories. I’d say that the gun owners here are aware of that fact.

[Gerald]

Portland police said in a statement on Sunday they arrested 14 people overnight and that crowd control munitions were used to disperse protesters.

https://www.reuters.com/video/watch/police-arrest-14-after-clashes-in-portla-idOVCSH6C8B

Police said they declared a riot just before midnight on Saturday after a group of about 250 people, many of them wearing black and carrying shields, helmets and gas masks, tried to march on a government building that has often been the scene of violence during nearly three months of nightly protests.:ping:

[Jimbuna]

^ Merged

[Jimbuna]

Kenosha shooting: Protests erupt after US police shoot black man

Protests have erupted in the US state of Wisconsin after police shot a black man several times while responding to what they said was a domestic incident.

The man, identified as Jacob Blake, is in a serious condition in hospital.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-53886070

[Catfish]

Video shows Blake being grabbed by his shirt from behind, then the cop shooting Blake in the back at least 7 times.
"Justified"? impossible to imagine any way that his shooting was justified.

"Anyone following the news for the past six months, and the past six years, has seen a numbing succession of these stories: An unarmed black person, usually a man or boy, is shot by police. There’s a good chance he has his back turned when multiple shots are fired. The incident is caught on video. There are demonstrations demanding reforms. Then some days or weeks later, in another city, the whole thing plays out again."

And they call demonstrations against such police action "anarchy"? This is clear racism. Time to wake up for all, what the hell is wrong over there? :nope:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdaMplhkqSo

[mapuc]

I see it as a domestic problem and it shall be solved
by the Americans them self.

Markus

[em2nought]

This is some dumb @ss B.S. we've got going here because the democrats have to get their way.



How about don't ignore what the Police are telling you to do, and then reach into your vehicle for "something". :hmmm:


I know better than to try reaching for something in my vehicle during a traffic stop, it wouldn't matter what color my skin is.

[Buddahaid]

.....How about don't ignore what the Police are telling you to do, and then reach into your vehicle for "something". :hmmm:


I know better than to try reaching for something in my vehicle during a traffic stop, it wouldn't matter what color my skin is.

That is the elephant in the room about this shooting.

[Jimbuna]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-53897641

The troubles have gone on for a second night so this doesn't look like it is going to die down any time soon.

Is seven shots not a little too excessive?

[Onkel Neal]

Video shows Blake being grabbed by his shirt from behind, then the cop shooting Blake in the back at least 7 times.
"Justified"? impossible to imagine any way that his shooting was justified.

"Anyone following the news for the past six months, and the past six years, has seen a numbing succession of these stories: An unarmed black person, usually a man or boy, is shot by police. There’s a good chance he has his back turned when multiple shots are fired. The incident is caught on video. There are demonstrations demanding reforms. Then some days or weeks later, in another city, the whole thing plays out again."

And they call demonstrations against such police action "anarchy"? This is clear racism. Time to wake up for all, what the hell is wrong over there? :nope:





Clearly you don't understand how this works. When the police are called to a domestic disturbance and they cannot get the suspect to cooperate, when the suspect ignores their orders, and lunges into his car like this idiot did, the officers' degree of risk goes off the scale. He has every right to shoot the guy. What if he just watched and the guy pulled a pistol out from his front seat and started shooting the officer? Then the officer can respond?

Do you need me to post some examples of times when a cop hesitated and then was shot?

Yeah, time for some more peaceful protests, board up the Apple store and sneaker shops.

[Catfish]

Blake may have been a thug or not, from a certain point on in the past i do not believe any US media anymore when it comes to police shootings, this is true for all sides involved.
So maybe Blake tried to evade, we do not know what he said, maybe he was ordered to get his papers out of the car, or maybe something completely different and he had an MG attached to his driver's seat, along with his three children in the car. Still possible of course.

On the other side three policemen, three guns, three tasers, three cans pepper spray, trained to tackle fleeing criminals from behind. Then grabbing a T-shirt instead of kicking his legs aside, securing him on the ground and tie his hands. Instead seven (or more) shots from behind, in self defence?
He still lives as far as i read.

edit:
What I read in different reports, which may all be wrong, is that Blake went out of the car to tell his son on the lawn to go into the car to the other kids, and then went to two women who were argueing and fighting. He was reportedly attempting to calm them down, according to multiple witnesses who spoke to local reporters. Blake was not part of the women's argument that precipitated the call to the police.

Mr. White is the one who saw the scene filmed the last seconds:

"After stepping away and coming back", White said "the scene drastically changed". Police were wrestling with Blake.

Then "One of them [police] had him [Blake] in a headlock and was punching him in his ribs, the other had him in a headlock on the other side of him and was pulling his arm."

"After they punched him in his rib, the female officer Tased him and Jacob kind of leaned on the car and they proceeded to wrestle him toward the back of the car and he went to the other side of the car."

This is when White begins to record the video.

[Buddahaid]

Oh please, I don't believe for a minute the police were looking for an excuse to shoot him by telling him to get his papers. They aren't Gestapo and they aren't the Argentinian police. You can see from the phone video he's not cooperating and isn't "not doin nuttin", he's not cooperating and escalating the situation and for all we know made a grab for the cops weapons when he lunged for the car door.

Taze him, kick his feet out from under him as he's walking away? Do you think that would have been perceived as anything other than police brutality? I'm sorry he's been shot and likely paralyzed, but I hold him largely responsible for that by his own behavior.

[Catfish]

^ True, something does not add up in those contradictory reports.
The papers thing is just an invention or theory i do not believe in.

If you look at him as a thug trying to get away ...
or if you look at him as someone who was trying to calm down the women and then get back to his kids..
No idea, i better stop speculating.

[August]

^ True, something does not add up in those contradictory reports.
The papers thing is just an invention or theory i do not believe in.

If you look at him as a thug trying to get away ...
or if you look at him as someone who was trying to calm down the women and then get back to his kids..
No idea, i better stop speculating.


When cops have their guns drawn and pointing at you and they are yelling at you to stop then you had better stop don't you think?

[Onkel Neal]

Yep, and every day hundreds of black men make the decision to comply with the officer, to stay calm, and don't get shot. It's the really stupid people who act like this and draw the short stick.

Just look at this spectator video
https://twitter.com/stillgray/status/1297866797060771842

And make sure you turn the volume ALL the way up for the full effect.
My god, can you imagine having to deal with this mob? Screeching and screaming, their small children wandering in and around the scene. How would you describe this behavior?

This will happen again, as long as people violate other people, break the law, steal and assault others, and fight with the cops.

Again, our country's soft-headed justice system is the underlying cause for this, this guy should have been in prison instead of on the street at all. (https://racinecountyeye.com/police-k9-dozer-helps-subdue-man-who-pulled-gun-at-bar/)

[Mr Quatro]

What happens if a black man shoots a little white boy riding his bike in his yard point blank on purpose?

Oh wait a minute that was last month old news, uh? :oops:

[em2nought]

What happens if a black man shoots a little white boy riding his bike in his yard point blank on purpose?

Oh wait a minute that was last month old news, uh? :oops:


That didn't make the news, and the fact checkers on facebook probably say any mention of it is false too. Is there a hear no, speak no, see no evil emoticon? There should be. :03:

[Catfish]

Yep, and every day hundreds of black men make the decision to comply with the officer, to stay calm, and don't get shot. It's the really stupid people who act like this and draw the short stick. [...]
Agreed.
Again, our country's soft-headed justice system is the underlying cause for this, this guy should have been in prison instead of on the street at all. (https://racinecountyeye.com/police-k9-dozer-helps-subdue-man-who-pulled-gun-at-bar/)
What does US law say about drunk/"intoxicated" (or crazy people) and wearing fire arms? Who decides?

[Bilge_Rat]

Interesting.

According to this, the autopsy found that George Floyd had a lethal dose of Fentanyl in his system when he died and the coroner could not determine if it was the Fentanyl overdose or the pressure on the neck, i.e. asphyxiation, that killed him.

https://alphanewsmn.com/george-floyd-lethal-fentanyl-autopsy/

If true, it means none of the police officers can be convicted of murder since the State will not be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was killed by asphyxiation.

[Jimbuna]

I'd hate to think what the response out on the street would be should that happen.

[Aktungbby]

Interesting.

According to this, the autopsy found that George Floyd had a lethal dose of Fentanyl in his system when he died and the coroner could not determine if it was the Fentanyl overdose or the pressure on the neck, i.e. asphyxiation, that killed him.

https://alphanewsmn.com/george-floyd-lethal-fentanyl-autopsy/

If true, it means none of the police officers can be convicted of murder since the State will not be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was killed by asphyxiation.
The Armed Forces Medical Examiner partially agreed with Dr. Baker, concluding that Floyd’s “death was caused by the police subdual and restraint in the setting of severe hypertensive atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, and methamphetamine and fentanyl intoxication,” per “Exhibit 5 (http://www.mncourts.gov/mncourtsgov/media/High-Profile-Cases/27-CR-20-12949-TT/Exhibit508252020.pdf).”
However, another document filed to the court, “Exhibit 2 (http://www.mncourts.gov/getattachment/Media/StateofMinnesotavTouThao/Container-Documents/Content-Documents/Exhibit-2.pdf.aspx?lang=en-US),” shows that two independent medical examiners, Dr. Michael Baden and Dr. Allecia Wilson, hired by Floyd’s family attributed his death to “traumatic asphyxia due to the compression of his neck and back during restraint by police.”
Exhibit 2 also notes that Baden and Wilson were “unable to complete their final reports,” as they lacked “microscopic slides, pictures, and other evidence gathered during Dr. Baker’s initial autopsy of Mr. Floyd.” :hmmm: :timeout: :roll::nope:

[Catfish]

https://alphanewsmn.com/george-floyd-lethal-fentanyl-autopsy/
If true, it means none of the police officers can be convicted of murder since the State will not be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was killed by asphyxiation.
But it is not true. See Aktungbby's post above with exhibits 2 and 5.

"Alphanews" tries to spread a lie.

No surprise: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/alpha-news/
"Overall, we rate Alpha News Questionable based on extreme right bias, poor sourcing of information, promotion of conspiracy theories, and anti-Islamic propaganda, as well as a lack of transparency regarding ownership."

[vienna]

I think a fundamental part of the problem issue is this: in similar situations where the suspect in question is white, the immediate rush to use lethal force is far less than with black/minority suspects; I've seem several situations over the years where a white suspect was wrestled to the ground or even punched/batoned to achieve compliance/arrest and. in similar situations have observed LEOs immediately pull guns on non-white suspects; I recall a night a Black friend of mine, myself, and a few other friends were outside of a rock club when a sort of straight, clean-cut, middle class-looking white guy went full freakout and the LAPD showed up; the guy swung at the officers, knocked down a couple of the offices, threw various heavy objects at them and, finally grabbed a big piece of metal rod and advanced on them; the LAPD officers swarmed the guy and it took about about six of them to put him on the ground and handcuff him after which they stood him up and pushed him into a squad car; one of our friends, a fellow long hair like myself, made the comment, "if that had been one of us, they'd have beaten us bad before they put us in the car", to which my Black friend said, "Hell, if that had been me doing that, they'd have shot me the first time I swung at them"; he made a very good point...

A lot f it is down to the training and the leadership of the law enforcement officers; if they have leadership that tolerates bad conduct by field officer or, perhaps, even encourages it, you're going to have problems; and, if their training emphasizes quick/immediate resort to lethal force, then you're really going to have problems...

When I first moved to LA, about 5 or six months in I had a run in with a couple of plainclothes undercover LAPD officers who confronted me on the street at about 2:30 am without identifying themselves and, when one of them made a move on me, I pulled a knife I carried to defend myself against these strangers; one pulled out a flashlight and a badge and the other pulled out a gun and they ordered me to freeze (hey, it was 1970, they still said things like that); seeing the badge, and importantly, the gun, I complied; they did all the usual, the pat down, the pocket emptying, the ID check for wants and warrants, etc., and when they could find nothing ill in my background, they asked me what I was doing out at that hour and I told them the truth, I worked at a bank data center on the swing shift and I had forgotten something I need the next day in my desk, and, with bus not running after midnight, I was walking back to the center to get what I needed; they also asked me why I don't stop when they first approached me and I asked why they didn't identify themselves as LAPD when they accosted me; just before they cut me loose, one officer took my knife, folded back up, handed it to me asking why I was carrying it; I told him "Because you never know when some SOB is gonna come up on you on a dark street and accost you"; both officers shot me dark glances, turned, got back into their beat up pickup truck (LAPD sometimes use the odd vehicle for undercover) and drove away...

I told some of my coworkers about the incident and they were aghast and shocked; I told them I was just lucky I wasn't arrested; they said "Man, that's they LAPD, you're lucky you weren't shot!!"; they then began to explain to me the facts of life regarding dealing with the LAPD, at the time; it was sort of the non-Black version of "The Talk" Black kids get from their parents about dealing with LEOs...

I've known good cops and I've known bad cops, including one who was notorious official in the Hollywood Vice Squad, and I've got to say, overll I've seen more good than bad, but the bad do get all the headlines; 'it bleeds, it leads', as they say; the LAPD has really undergone remarkable changes for the better since the Old Guard leadership was swept away after they botched the response to the 1994 LA Riots, particularly after a really good GOP mayor who put problem-solving over politics took office and got NYPD's Bill Bratton to come in as LAPD Chief and clean house in the Department; its a lot harder for the marginal cops to get away with misconduct...




<O>

[vienna]

Here's a followup on the June riot and looting that took place in the LA area in June; there have been dozens of arrests and more are coming; the suspicion/conclusion I had formed that the bulk of the damage was the result of organized criminal elements is being borne out by the announcement by this Joint Task Force:


Task force announces several dozen arrests tied to recent massive protests in L.A. County --

https://www.dailynews.com/2020/08/26/task-force-announces-several-dozen-arrests-tied-to-recent-massive-protests-in-l-a-county/


...TV coverage of the same:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z419g_yfw3Q


I don't know about other areas, but, if you watched the news coverage in the LA area, particularly aerial news coverage, it was pretty obvious the looting was coordinated by elements not at all associated with the protests; in fact, in all the news coverage I saw, from all the different lootings in all the different cities, the destruction and theft was centered in areas at least a half-mile away from the main protest bodies, and, in the case of here in Hollywood, the attempted looting was a full mile away from the protesters; in all cases I saw, the looter swaited until the protests had moved away from their targets, along with the LEOs riding herd on the marchers before descending like locusts on their objectives; there was about a week of protest, and the LEOs got really good about halfway through with sussing out the game the looters were playing and how they were working it; about a month ago, one of those arrested was found to have been an employee of a security service who would have had knowledge of retail security; he was charged with the arson fire of a Long Beach store set ti try to destroy evidence of the looting there; unfortunately for him, and a lot of the other miscreants and thugs, aside from the usual surveillance systems, there are an awful lot of non-looters with phone cameras who were only too happy too pass on their footage to the authorities...




<O>

[Bilge_Rat]

But it is not true. See Aktungbby's post above with exhibits 2 and 5.

"Alphanews" tries to spread a lie.

No surprise: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/alpha-news/
"Overall, we rate Alpha News Questionable based on extreme right bias, poor sourcing of information, promotion of conspiracy theories, and anti-Islamic propaganda, as well as a lack of transparency regarding ownership."

no, everything I said was correct.

First, "MediaBiasFactCheck" is not a legitimate org, it is a bunch of left wing activists, so their "opinion" is meaningless. Second, the article includes links to the actual court exhibits which you can read yourself. If you had, you would see that the article faithfully reports what is in the actual exhibits.

Now that we have that nonsense out of the way, let's look at the actual facts.

There were three reports, the 1st, by the official medical examiner concludes Floyd had a "fatal level" of Fentanyl in his system and that he saw "no physical evidence suggesting" he "died of asphyxiation". So Floyd could have died anyway that day from an overdose, even without the police action. So the 1st report basically says the Fentanyl is what killed him.

The second, by the Armed Forces Medical Examiner concluded the death was caused by "police restraint in the setting of severe" heart" disease, and...fentanyl intoxication". So the 2nd report says he died because of a combination of police restraint, underlyng health issues and a drug overdose.

The third report was by examiners hired by the Floyd family and seems to be based only on the video evidence. It concludes Floyd died from asphyxiation.

So three experts report which all come to different conclusions. Which is correct? Well in a sense, it does not matter, the prosecution cannot pick and choose the one it likes best. The prosecution has to prove its case, including the cause of death, beyond a reasonable doubt.

The official County medical examiner concluding he was probably killed by the Fentanyl overdose and not by asphyxiation is a classic case of "reasonable doubt" which logically would lead to the acquittal of all 4 from a charge of murder. You cannot convict someone of murder if you cannot prove that it was his actions that was the direct cause of death.

Note that that does not mean that Chauvin at least, might not be guilty of a lesser offence, like involuntary manslaughter. For example, you punch someone in the face and he dies of a heart attack because of it. You are not guilty of murder because it was not your intention to kill him, but you could be guilty of manslaughter because it was your illegal action, i.e. the punch, that led to his death.

[Catfish]

Two links Aktungbby provided. Do you know what sickle cell trait is?

http://www.mncourts.gov/mncourtsgov/media/High-Profile-Cases/27-CR-20-12949-TT/Exhibit508252020.pdf

http://www.mncourts.gov/getattachment/Media/StateofMinnesotavTouThao/Container-Documents/Content-Documents/Exhibit-2.pdf.aspx?lang=en-US

You can read about "Alphanews" bias yourself i guess, it is all over the net.

[Aktungbby]

Two links Aktungbby provided. Do you know what sickle cell trait is?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sickle_cell_disease (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sickle_cell_disease) As of 2015, about 4.4 million people have sickle cell disease, while an additional 43 million have sickle cell trait. About 80% of sickle cell disease cases are believed to occur in Sub-Saharan Africa (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sub-Saharan_Africa). It also occurs relatively frequently in parts of India (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India), the Arabian Peninsula (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabian_Peninsula), and among people of African origin (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_diaspora) living in other parts of the world.In 2015, it resulted in about 114,800 deaths.The condition was first described in the medical literature by American physician James B. Herrick (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_B._Herrick) in 1910.In 1949, its genetic transmission was determined by E. A. Beet and J. V. Neel. In 1954, the protective effect against malaria (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaria) of sickle cell trait was described. About 90% of people survive to age 20, and close to 50% survive beyond age 50. In 2001, according to one study performed in Jamaica, the estimated mean survival for people was 53 years for men and 58 years for women with homozygous SCD. The specific life expectancy in much of the developing world is unknown. In 1975 about 7.3% of people with SCD died before their 23rd birthday; while in 1989 2.6% of people with SCD died by the age of 20. A person can have a mixture of normal and faulty hemoglobin in their red blood cells without having sickle cell disease. This condition is called "sickle cell trait." People with sickle cell trait have enough normal hemoglobin in their red blood cells to prevent the cells from sickling. One in 12 African Americans in the United States has sickle cell trait. It's important to remember that people with sickle cell trait do not have sickle cell disease. They also usually do not develop sickle cell disease, except in unusual circumstances. However, people with sickle cell trait can genetically pass the trait to their children. If two people with sickle cell trait have children together, there is a 1 in 4 chance that their children will have sickle cell anemia. https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/4579-sickle-cell-anemia (https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/4579-sickle-cell-anemia)

[Onkel Neal]

But a fuller picture is slowly emerging. Here’s a brief look at what we know.

It began, as officer-involved shootings often do, with a call to the police. The dispatcher told the cops that a woman had called, and that Blake “isn’t supposed to be there and he took the complainant’s keys and is refusing to give them back.” (An attorney for Blake’s family has said Blake was trying to break up a fight between two women.) The dispatcher also told officers that there was a “wanted” alert for someone at the address; indeed, Blake had a warrant for his arrest based on charges of third-degree sexual assault, trespassing, and disorderly conduct in connection with domestic abuse.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/08/what-we-know-about-the-jacob-blake-shooting/

[mapuc]

This I'm convinced of.

The coming trial of the accused police officers, will be a battle of Forensic technique and evidence between the lawyers.


Markus

[Buddahaid]

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/08/what-we-know-about-the-jacob-blake-shooting/

So further evidence he wasn't doing anything.....

[Onkel Neal]

"Who" wasn't doing anything? What? Blake wasn't doing anything? Is that what you're saying?

Blake was at his gf's house and she wanted him to leave her alone. She called the cops to have him remoeved because he wouldn't leave when asked.

Cops get there, discover this guy has a felony warrant out on him for "sexual assault". They are obligated by to arrest him and bring him in.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EgYWJqOXkAAjyfi?format=jpg&name=large

The rest is obvious.

[Buddahaid]

Blake. I keep hearing protesters saying he wasn't doing anything.

[Catfish]

It certainly is a good idea to be cooperative, but that doesn't mean cops that f.. up shouldn't be held responsible.

[mapuc]

The only thing I wonder is:

Was it necessary to shoot him 7 times in the back ?

Markus

[Buddahaid]

True but I not sure where or if that started. Should the cops have let a person with a felony arrest warrant for sexual assault drive off in a car with kids in it and a person that wasn't cooperating to boot? A car can be a deadly weapon and the cops wouldn't want to fire into a car with kids in it so they couldn't let him drive off.

[Catfish]

True but I not sure where or if that started.
True, and the rest is all speculation, but for the filmed seven shots.
Don't tasers work? Would have one shot been enough?

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53950621?intlink_from_url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world&link_location=live-reporting-story

Ok yes i agree no one knows what happened exactly. Despite this, minor criminals can be arrested with less hazzle all over the world.

[Mr Quatro]

Blake wasn't bending over to get in his car ... He could've just slid in to do that :yep:

He was bending over to get his knife under the drivers side foot carpet, plus
FB photo shows a deadly knife that was hidden in his belt that he had just removed before he got to the drivers side of his car.

True FB could've passed on a photo shopped knife in his hand, but it looked real to me.

[Catfish]

Blake wasn't bending over to get in his car ... He could've just slid in to do that :yep:
He was bending over to get his knife under the drivers side foot carpet, plus
FB photo shows a deadly knife that was hidden in his belt that he had just removed before he got to the drivers side of his car.
No easy situation.
Still: Three police officers, three x guns, tasers, pepper spray, handcuffs. And seven shots, from behind?
How do other (western) countries arrest minor criminals grabbing for a knife.

[Buddahaid]

And he couldn't be allowed to get in the car. Bad for him because if cops have to shoot they don't screw around and one shot isn't enough to put someone down in many cases.

[u crank]

No easy situation.
Still: Three police officers, three x guns, tasers, pepper spray, handcuffs. And seven shots, from behind?


It is unfortunate that they couldn't subdue him and put cuffs on him. But they tried. Two tasers were used but didn't work. He wasn't shot seven times. Seven shots were fired, four hit him.

But the sad truth is that Jacob Blake was given every opportunity to have this turn out different. He chose not to. When police officers say that you are under arrest you should listen. When police officers have their guns drawn you should do exactly what they say.

[em2nought]

No easy situation.
Still: Three police officers, three x guns, tasers, pepper spray, handcuffs. And seven shots, from behind?
How do other (western) countries arrest minor criminals grabbing for a knife.
Narwhal tusks?
https://i0.wp.com/www.powerlineblog.com/ed-assets/2019/12/Screen-Shot-2019-12-01-at-5.30.49-PM.png?resize=580%2C347&ssl=1

[Onkel Neal]

It certainly is a good idea to be cooperative, but that doesn't mean cops that f.. up shouldn't be held responsible.

Most people agree. If someone is wanted and resists arrest, then he's the one who screwed up.

Btw, is sexual assault a minor crime now?:06:

When police officers say that you are under arrest you should listen. When police officers have their guns drawn you should do exactly what they say.

Man, ain't that the truth. It just confirms my argument that it's mostly stupid people getting shot like this. We don't hear about the 10,000 people being stopped daily by the law because they don't act a fool.

[Aktungbby]

It is unfortunate that they couldn't subdue him and put cuffs on him. But they tried. Two tasers were used but didn't work. He wasn't shot seven times. Seven shots were fired, four hit him.

But the sad truth is that Jacob Blake was given every opportunity to have this turn out different. He chose not to. When police officers say that you are under arrest you should listen. When police officers have their guns drawn you should do exactly what they say.


I just love it that four bullets hit the perpetrator out of seven discharged at 'point-blank' range :hmmm:...which means three rounds were not 'on-target'...in an car situation with three innocent children seated in the vehicle!:k_confused:

[Jimbuna]

Jacob Blake, the black man shot in the back by police in the US state of Wisconsin, has reportedly been released from handcuffs while in hospital.

Police in Kenosha had said that Mr Blake was in custody for previous warrants and the handcuffs were policy.

His attorney told US media that these warrants had been cancelled and that officers guarding Mr Blake had left.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-53950621

[Bilge_Rat]

As predicted, Chauvin's lawyer is already arguing the case should be dismissed because Floyd died from an overdose of Fentanyl:

Defense attorneys sought to put the blame on Floyd for his death, arguing that his alleged drug use was the critical factor.

"Put simply, Mr. Floyd could not breathe because he had ingested a lethal dose of fentanyl and, possibly, a speedball," Chauvin's attorney said in the court documents. "Combined with sickle cell trait, his pre-existing heart conditions, Mr. Floyd’s use of fentanyl and methamphetamine most likely killed him."

They argued that without knowledge of Floyd's alleged drug use or symptoms of overdose, Chauvin "was unaware of the potential dangerous of using MRT (Maximal Restraint Technique)," a reference to the officer's knee on the victim's neck.

"Instead, he (Chauvin) relied on his training and the information available to him to try and assist his fellow officers and to prevent Mr. Floyd from harming himself," the defense attorneys argued. "Derek Chauvin did not cause George Floyd’s death."

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/08/29/minneapolis-officer-derek-chauvin-seeks-dismissal-george-floyd-murder-charges/5669077002/

This will most likely end up with some sort of plea deal.

[August]

Bet you won't find this on the Dem media...

Black man hits unexpecting white man in head with brick in Baltimore

https://www.news.com.au/technology/online/social/shocking-video-of-man-attacked-from-behind-while-walking-shared-on-instagram/news-story/759ab093027feaa475d3e94127f4d256

[Catfish]

Trump defends accused Kenosha gunman, declines to condemn violence from his supporters

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-global-race-usa-trump/trump-defends-accused-kenosha-gunman-declines-to-condemn-violence-from-his-supporters-idUSKBN25R2R1

This is all very strange, seems he just wanted to defend himself.
But if you are going to a pro-Trump demonstration, you carry an assault rifle? As a 17-year-old? Looking for trouble?

[Bilge_Rat]

Trump defends accused Kenosha gunman, declines to condemn violence from his supporters

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-global-race-usa-trump/trump-defends-accused-kenosha-gunman-declines-to-condemn-violence-from-his-supporters-idUSKBN25R2R1

This is all very strange, seems he just wanted to defend himself.
But if you are going to a pro-Trump demonstration, you carry an assault rifle? As a 17-year-old? Looking for trouble?

well no, if you watch it, you see Trump was asked a gotcha question by a reporter who wanted him to condemn Kyle. Trump pointed out that it looked like self-defence, which it does, but that they were investigating.

As to what Kyle was doing there, according to his defence lawyer, he was helping a friend defend his property from looting when he was isolated and attacked by an armed mob, many armed with firearms and he acted in self-defence. The videotape does seem to back that up.

But that is the way all these things go, something happens, there is an immediate rush to judgment depending on your political affiliation, but eventually the truth will come out, as you are seeing now with the Floyd case.

[Catfish]

I found this, looks a bit different here:
https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/08/31/witnesses-kenosha-shooting-see-kyle-rittenhouse-shoot-protest-jacob-blake/5675987002/

But when the potus immediately knows what happened and defends the shooter all is wonderful.
B.t.w. did you check out sickle disease and fentanyl?

[mapuc]

And again.

In one of my former post in this thread I mentioned shot 7 times in his back

One of your corrected me and said there was fired 7 shot against him and 4 of them hit him in the back

Just 10 minutes ago I clearly heard in the Swedish news.

It's almost a week ago since Blake was hit seven times in the back.

This is MSM

I presume I would get correct information from them.

Markus

[Bilge_Rat]

B.t.w. did you check out sickle disease and fentanyl?

You would have to tell me what point you are trying to make, I have not been able to figure it out.

[MaDef]

mupac, until an official report (or press conference) is made available, I would take any information with a grain of salt. Eyewitnesses are notoriously inaccurate. (I believe they are wrong about 70% of the time.)

[Onkel Neal]

So, what's the verdict going to be? Guilty is my guess. Probably still be some peaceful protests (rioting and looting).

Big question: What's the sentence going to be? Anything short of hanging in the town square and we're back to rioting.

[Rockstar]

I thought the State did a good job. So I'm expecting guilty of 2nd degree murder.

[Jeff-Groves]

No matter the verdict?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_3eC35LoF4U&t=48s


You know even if he is hung in a public square? That will not satisfy people.
I expect, and predict, massive riots.

[Buddahaid]

So, what's the verdict going to be? Guilty is my guess. Probably still be some peaceful protests (rioting and looting).

Big question: What's the sentence going to be? Anything short of hanging in the town square and we're back to rioting.

Isn't that referred to as a mob lynching?

[Jeff-Groves]

Isn't that referred to as a mob lynching?
Depends on if you wear a white robe and hood or scream BLM slogans don't you think?
Mob lynching is not the providence of any one group.
It is open to anyone. Just depends on the twist they put to it.

[Rockstar]

Isn't that referred to as a mob lynching?




Ask Maxine Waters the liberal left wing nut job Democrat from California.. Leave to the Bidenettes to shoot themselves in the foot. idiots.

WATCH: Judge Scolds Maxine Waters for ‘Abhorrent’ Comments, Says She ‘May Have Given’ Chauvin an Argument for Appeal


https://www.mediaite.com/news/watch-judge-scolds-maxine-waters-for-abhorrent-comments-says-she-may-have-given-chauvin-an-argument-for-appeal/


Nelson referenced Waters’ recent comments as she joined a protest in Minneapolis that if Chauvin was not convicted that they would have to “get more confrontational (https://www.mediaite.com/politics/maxine-waters-accused-of-incitement-by-republicans-for-urging-protesters-to-get-more-confrontational/),” calling it “mind-boggling” that “we have U.S. Representatives threatening acts of violence in relation to this specific case.”
Nelson had not mentioned Waters by name, but Cahill was clear on the reference he was making. “Well, I’ll give you that Congresswoman Waters may have given you something on appeal that may result in this whole trial being overturned,” the judge said, “but what’s the state’s position?”

[Aktungbby]

So, what's the verdict going to be? Guilty is my guess. Probably still be some peaceful protests (rioting and looting).

Big question: What's the sentence going to be? Anything short of hanging in the town square and we're back to rioting.Mr Chauvin will likely get 12.5 years same as Mohammed Nooor the Mpls. cop who idiotically shot & killed Justine Damond a few years back as she approached the vehicle, having called the police to report an assault.

[Texas Red]

To be perfectly honest it wouldn't surprise me if he went to prison and somebody killed him in there. Considering what he did, it wouldn't be crazy to wonder if someone would kill him when he got to prison since:

1. He is a former cop, he probably put some in prison, and by astronomical unluckiness he went to the same prison as a person he put away and was killed
2. He killed a person in a racially motivated crime and so someone who would take offense to his crime would probably try to kill him.

[Buddahaid]

Ask Maxine Waters the liberal left wing nut job Democrat from California.. Leave to the Bidenettes to shoot themselves in the foot. idiots.

WATCH: Judge Scolds Maxine Waters for ‘Abhorrent’ Comments, Says She ‘May Have Given’ Chauvin an Argument for Appeal


https://www.mediaite.com/news/watch-judge-scolds-maxine-waters-for-abhorrent-comments-says-she-may-have-given-chauvin-an-argument-for-appeal/


Nelson referenced Waters’ recent comments as she joined a protest in Minneapolis that if Chauvin was not convicted that they would have to “get more confrontational (https://www.mediaite.com/politics/maxine-waters-accused-of-incitement-by-republicans-for-urging-protesters-to-get-more-confrontational/),” calling it “mind-boggling” that “we have U.S. Representatives threatening acts of violence in relation to this specific case.”
Nelson had not mentioned Waters by name, but Cahill was clear on the reference he was making. “Well, I’ll give you that Congresswoman Waters may have given you something on appeal that may result in this whole trial being overturned,” the judge said, “but what’s the state’s position?”

You'd think after the mess at the capital and allegations of incitement by "Trump" (hi August), people would engage their brains before their audio flappers, but hey, these are politicians and I think they are all nuts, some are rolling too far and falling off the table at all sides.

[3catcircus]

To be perfectly honest it wouldn't surprise me if he went to prison and somebody killed him in there. Considering what he did, it wouldn't be crazy to wonder if someone would kill him when he got to prison since:

1. He is a former cop, he probably put some in prison, and by astronomical unluckiness he went to the same prison as a person he put away and was killed
2. He killed a person in a racially motivated crime and so someone who would take offense to his crime would probably try to kill him.

Number 1 is possible.

Your conjecture, however, in number 2, is patently false. Officer Chauvin committed no crime of racial bias. He was enforcing Minnesota law as it exists using compliance holds taught by the Minneapolis police department. The man who he was arresting for passing counterfeit bills recently had covid, had enough fentanyl in him to be fatal for most people, had a pre-existing heart condition, and was noncompliant in the arrest. He was also predisposed to violent criminal behavior given his multiple past run-ins with law enforcement.

A person who was trying to put a criminal past behind themselves wouldn't be using illegal drugs or passing counterfeit money. Unfortunate as it may be, George Floyd killed George Floyd.

[Texas Red]

Makes sense.

[Buddahaid]

If I remember right Floyd and Chauvin also had past history outside the police force. He was accused of passing one $20.00 bill and it never should have escalated to that point over $20.00. There is enough there to show the police had a hand in it instead of cooling down and letting him go. It's not as if they didn't know who it was and could issue a warrant, and them again, it's not my town and I wasn't there.

[3catcircus]

If I remember right Floyd and Chauvin also had past history outside the police force. He was accused of passing one $20.00 bill and it never should have escalated to that point over $20.00. There is enough there to show the police had a hand in it instead of cooling down and letting him go. It's not as if they didn't know who it was and could issue a warrant, and them again, it's not my town and I wasn't there.

There is a difference between someone who goes to the ATM to extract cash that later turns out to be counterfeit vs. someone who knew they were paying counterfeit money. Could they have written him a ticket? Sure, but that outcome is predicated on not being a complete jerk and not being cooperative. Had Floyd said, "Hey, I don't know it was counterfeit - I got it as change when I was at the store," he'd have been out a fake $20. Had he said, "yeah I knew it was fake," but otherwise been cooperative, he'd have gotten a ticket. Instead, he was uncooperative (exacerbated by being high) to the point of needing to be restrained. The Wash Times article below is quite enlightening for those who've only seen the story as reported by CNN or Yahoo News...

https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/aug/4/george-floyd-resisting-officers-leaked-police-body/

[Catfish]

You would have to tell me what point you are trying to make, I have not been able to figure it out.
re the fentanyl that had been found in Mr. Floyd's blood, seems to be an often used medicine if you have sickle cell anemy (common among black people), which he had.
No idea whether this lead to his death, but first stories tried to state that Mr Floyd was "high on drugs" or something like that.

[Onkel Neal]

...it never should have escalated to that point over $20.00.

Oh, I don't think the $20 was anything other than the initial cause for the police to be called. What clearly escalated the situation, as in so many of these encounters, was Mr. Floyd's repeated and aggressive refusal to comply with the police when he was arrested.

[u crank]

Oh, I don't think the $20 was anything other than the initial cause for the police to be called. What clearly escalated the situation, as in so many of these encounters, was Mr. Floyd's repeated and aggressive refusal to comply with the police when he was arrested.

And this seems to be a standard reaction now. Is it based on the belief that if I resist they will let me go? A bystander can be heard saying to Floyd "you can't win". Once the police decide to arrest or detain they are not going to change their minds.

[3catcircus]

re the fentanyl that had been found in Mr. Floyd's blood, seems to be an often used medicine if you have sickle cell anemy (common among black people), which he had.
No idea whether this lead to his death, but first stories tried to state that Mr Floyd was "high on drugs" or something like that.

He *absolutely* was high at the time of arrest. The bodycams of the arresting officers shows him incoherent, slurring his words, and being combatively uncooperative.

The coroner's report showed fentanyl, cannabinoid metabolites, and crystal meth at concentrations consistent with being a chronic drug abuser.

The fentanyl levels were well outside the normal range associated with therapeutic use. They were, in fact, so high, that they indicated significant fentanyl tolerance associated with drug abuse. Additionally, he had sickle cell *trait* which is an asymptomatic condition that does not normally require any type of pain control medication.

[3catcircus]

And this seems to be a standard reaction now. Is it based on the belief that if I resist they will let me go? A bystander can be heard saying to Floyd "you can't win". Once the police decide to arrest or detain they are not going to change their minds.

As I keep saying... The police are a *consequence* of the law. Their decision to arrest someone is based on a significant level of professional discretion. That discretion usually dependss upon how hard you have to make them work when dealing with you, with some situations requiring them to arrest you regardless.

An encounter over a counterfeit $20 bill and a cooperative suspect = a ticket and a direction to leave the premises.

Be difficult and you'll likely get a response of something like "you made me chase you?!?! Here's a good dose of wooden shampoo for making me have to run!!!"

At the far end are the fools who decide to fight an arrest or pull a weapon. *All* of the current law enforcement training pounds home the message that an initially friendly and cooperative domestic or traffic stop can end with the death of the officer because they let down their guard when the person they interacted with decided to pull a weapon and attack.

The message is simple: if you are a member of the public interacting with the police, just behave. You're chances of going to jail for minor offenses is essentially zero. Your treatment if that are arresting you for warrants or serious crimes will be civil. If you are being improperly arrested, court is the place to challenge it, not on the side of the road.

If you are engaged in civil disobedience, you are going in expecting to be arrested and have plans in place for your lawyer to be standing by and ready to bail you... The whole purpose is publicizing the situation with an intent to challenge the law in court

If you are an antifa rioter/looter, that isn't civil disobedience. Not is rioting that results from the verdict of a case like this.

[Catfish]

He *absolutely* was high at the time of arrest. [...].
Sources?

"Blackwell also pointed out that Floyd had a low level of methamphetamine in his system. Fowler agreed the pills found in the squad car were obviously not in Floyd's body, and no pills were found in his stomach during autopsy."

https://www.cbsnews.com/live-updates/derek-chauvin-trial-george-floyd-death-day-13-2021-04-14/

[3catcircus]

Sources?

"Blackwell also pointed out that Floyd had a low level of methamphetamine in his system. Fowler agreed the pills found in the squad car were obviously not in Floyd's body, and no pills were found in his stomach during autopsy."

https://www.cbsnews.com/live-updates/derek-chauvin-trial-george-floyd-death-day-13-2021-04-14/

https://www.hennepin.us/-/media/hennepinus/residents/public-safety/documents/floyd-autopsy-6-3-20.pdf

The coroner's report (link above) shows someone with fentanyl levels consistent with non-therapeutic use. It shows cannabis, meth, and morphine levels consistent with recent use (including cannabis metabolite levels consistent with being high at the time of arrest). The blood screening shows no antemortem sickling - i.e. - no sickle cell anemia that would warrant prescription use of fentanyl. The report also shows no indication of damage to the lungs or trachea as a result of his being held down. Lastly, it shows an enlarged heart consistent with cardiovascular disease and hypertension.

Fact of the matter is that a person with a criminal record for violent behavior chose to get high, pass counterfeit money, and then violently resist arrest. The bodycams produced as evidence during the trial refute the claim that he was being suffocated because the officer's knee was on his back/shoulder and not compressing his trachea nor his carotid arteries.

George Floyd killed George Floyd.

[Rockstar]

To be perfectly honest it wouldn't surprise me if he went to prison and somebody killed him in there. Considering what he did, it wouldn't be crazy to wonder if someone would kill him when he got to prison since:

1. He is a former cop, he probably put some in prison, and by astronomical unluckiness he went to the same prison as a person he put away and was killed
2. He killed a person in a racially motivated crime and so someone who would take offense to his crime would probably try to kill him.




The court proceedings were televised. At what point did you hear the prosecution say race was a motivating factor? I must have missed that part.

[Catfish]

I am not schooled enough in medicine to judge the quantities found in this report, and i do not know what this * exactly means ?

*In this case, the level of methamphetamine determined has not been differentiated according to its isomeric forms. Differentiation of the isomers of methamphetamine is available upon request. :hmmm:

Again: " [...] Fowler agreed that Floyd had a normal respiratory rate before he died, and someone suffering from a fentanyl overdose would have a lowered respiratory rate. But he qualified his answer by saying it's possible Floyd would have otherwise had a higher respiratory rate because of the stress of the police restraint.

Blackwell also pointed out that Floyd had a low level of methamphetamine in his system. Fowler agreed the pills found in the squad car were obviously not in Floyd's body, and no pills were found in his stomach during autopsy.

"Correct -- whatever the residual amount in those tablets was, was not in his body," Fowler said."

Be it as it may, if you kneel on someone and he is obviously not in the condition to fight anyone, and he tells you that he cannot breathe, and you continue to kneel on his chest for nine minutes, is that the correct action to be taken?

[3catcircus]

I am not schooled enough in medicine to judge the quantities found in this report, and i do not know what this * exactly means ?

*In this case, the level of methamphetamine determined has not been differentiated according to its isomeric forms. Differentiation of the isomers of methamphetamine is available upon request. :hmmm:

Again: " [...] Fowler agreed that Floyd had a normal respiratory rate before he died, and someone suffering from a fentanyl overdose would have a lowered respiratory rate. But he qualified his answer by saying it's possible Floyd would have otherwise had a higher respiratory rate because of the stress of the police restraint.

Blackwell also pointed out that Floyd had a low level of methamphetamine in his system. Fowler agreed the pills found in the squad car were obviously not in Floyd's body, and no pills were found in his stomach during autopsy.

"Correct -- whatever the residual amount in those tablets was, was not in his body," Fowler said."

Be it as it may, if you kneel on someone and he is obviously not in the condition to fight anyone, and he tells you that he cannot breathe, and you continue to kneel on his chest for nine minutes, is that the correct action to be taken?

The level of methamphetamine is irrelevant - it's a red herring. The levels of cannabinoids, fentanyl, and free morphine are what is important because all the of them are a cardiovascular depressant. Combine all of them in someone with an already compromised cardiovascular system, and you risk coma or death *regardless* of being proned out, sleeping, or whatever. Additionally, Floyd made *multiple* false claims of distress before being taken out of the vehicle that likely led the officers to treat any true claims of distress the same.

Could/should the police have administered NARCAN? Sure, but that's predicated on administering it to a no combative person.

Go look at the additional bodycam footage. You'll see the truth is significantly different than the media is portraying.

[MaDef]

As I keep saying... The police are a *consequence* of the law. Their decision to arrest someone is based on a significant level of professional discretion.

An encounter over a counterfeit $20 bill and a cooperative suspect = a ticket and a direction to leave the premises. That's a bit of an oversimplification isn't it? There are Federal, State, County, and city/town laws, rules and regulations, and those are further split into infractions, misdemeanors, or felonies. Those are further split into classes such as A,B,C, or I,II,III, etc.

In the case of possessing/passing counterfeit money, that is a Federal Felony and in this case police were required by statute to arrest Floyd and charge him with forgery.

To illustrate my point:

According to federal law, crimes involving counterfeit currency are felonies; they carry a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison, as well as a fine. The maximum punishment is the same, regardless of the defendant’s relationship to the counterfeit money. In other words, the court could sentence you to 20 years in prison, whether you produced the counterfeit money, attempted to spend it, or simply were caught with the fake money in your possession.

What happens if you did not know that the money was fake? Is it not a gross injustice to send someone to prison for 20 years simply for buying something with cash that they thought was legitimate? It is unfair, but it sometimes happens. In 2017, Syed Ali of Houston faced criminal charges after he bought food at a Taco Bell with a fake $10 bill. Ali had gotten the bill from his father, who had received it as change after making a purchase at Home Depot. He was charged with forgery, which carries a sentence of two to 10 years.

While police have discretionary powers (taking into custody vs. a ticket or citation) while enforcing laws, there are some laws that by statute require arrest.

[Commander Wallace]

The level of methamphetamine is irrelevant - it's a red herring. The levels of cannabinoids, fentanyl, and free morphine are what is important because all the of them are a cardiovascular depressant. Combine all of them in someone with an already compromised cardiovascular system, and you risk coma or death *regardless* of being proned out, sleeping, or whatever. Additionally, Floyd made *multiple* false claims of distress before being taken out of the vehicle that likely led the officers to treat any true claims of distress the same.

Could/should the police have administered NARCAN? Sure, but that's predicated on administering it to a no combative person.

Go look at the additional bodycam footage. You'll see the truth is significantly different than the media is portraying.


What you fail to understand is that in law, there is a simple tenant that you take people where you find them. Look it up. Does it take 4 officers to to hold down someone who is already restrained and handcuffed ? I think not. By most accounts, George Floyd was probably dead for 3 minutes before Chauvin took his knee off his Floyd's neck.

Even the pulmonary Physician who testified stated that a healthy person could not withstand the amount of pressure that Chauvin used in this arrest. This tells me your drug argument is without merit.

Even Chauvin's own officers crossed " the thin blue line " to condemn Chauvin's actions. I think this was a bit of damage control on behalf of the police dept there. However, fantasies and smoke screens won't change the fact that Floyd was murdered. Pure and simple.

[3catcircus]

That's a bit of an oversimplification isn't it? There are Federal, State, County, and city/town laws, rules and regulations, and those are further split into infractions, misdemeanors, or felonies. Those are further split into classes such as A,B,C, or I,II,III, etc.

In the case of possessing/passing counterfeit money, that is a Federal Felony and in this case police were required by statute to arrest Floyd and charge him with forgery.

To illustrate my point:



While police have discretionary powers (taking into custody vs. a ticket or citation) while enforcing laws, there are some laws that by statute require arrest.

That they are supposed to arrest someone by statute doesn't mean that they always do so. If I have to fill out a bunch of paperwork for a collar that I'm not going to get credit for anyway, and the person in question is cooperative and didn't know that the money is counterfeit, I'm gonna find some other thing. Have him throw the crumpled up bill on the ground and write a ticket for littering...

I've been pulled over for speeding before when I was but a wee lad. I knew I was speeding. The cop knew it. I wasn't truculently assertive of my rights. I had my license, registration, and insurance card in order. He wrote me a $40 ticket for "obstructed view" for my EZpass holder instead of a $200 ticket and points. Compare that to the all-too-often stop where the cop gets attitude, the car isn't registered or the driver has a suspended license and warrants, the driver doesn't comply and ends up reaching for a weapon or takes off requiring the cop to give chase...

Just behave when dealing with the cops.

[mapuc]

I have, as an outsider, no right to point fingers or telling you how it should be done.

I can tell you how I feel following the news here and on CNN and a little from the trial-I feel sad.

Yes He was overdoing his job-But it feels like his colleague in order not to lose face has turned they back on him.

Markus

[Rockstar]

Be it as it may, if you kneel on someone and he is obviously not in the condition to fight anyone, and he tells you that he cannot breathe, and you continue to kneel on his chest for nine minutes, is that the correct action to be taken?


There are certain approved methods to compell compliance. Kneeling on a suspects body is one of them. In my opion based on my training it is not the correct action to continue such pressure once the situation is under control. Once cuffed the threat has been removed. The next step is to provide first aid if it is required. When someone complains they cannot breath its also the officer job to look into that, not ignore it while continuing downward pressure on a man's neck. I think what Chauvan did was wrong and against any departments policy and lead to the death of the suspect.

[Onkel Neal]

Don't get me wrong, imo the cop contributed to his demise with a stupid move. I'm not a legal expert so I don't have an opinion on what charge should stick but he's guilty of something along the lines of neglect. There was no sensible reason to stay on the criminal's neck with no regard for his status.

I agree with Rockstar

[MaDef]

That they are supposed to arrest someone by statute doesn't mean that they always do so. If I have to fill out a bunch of paperwork for a collar that I'm not going to get credit for anyway, and the person in question is cooperative and didn't know that the money is counterfeit, I'm gonna find some other thing. Have him throw the crumpled up bill on the ground and write a ticket for littering...

I've been pulled over for speeding before when I was but a wee lad. I knew I was speeding. The cop knew it. I wasn't truculently assertive of my rights. I had my license, registration, and insurance card in order. He wrote me a $40 ticket for "obstructed view" for my EZpass holder instead of a $200 ticket and points. Compare that to the all-too-often stop where the cop gets attitude, the car isn't registered or the driver has a suspended license and warrants, the driver doesn't comply and ends up reaching for a weapon or takes off requiring the cop to give chase...

Just behave when dealing with the cops.

And therein is the difference, speeding can be an infraction, a misdemeanor, or a felony depending on circumstances, hence the LEO's discretion on your ticket. Possession of counterfeit currency is a felony no matter the circumstances. It is then up to the court to decide whether a crime has been committed.

[AVGWarhawk]

Don't get me wrong, imo the cop contributed to his demise with a stupid move. I'm not a legal expert so I don't have an opinion on what charge should stick but he's guilty of something along the lines of neglect. There was no sensible reason to stay on the criminal's neck with no regard for his status.

I agree with Rockstar

Concur. Manslaughter would be the charge I believe. However, was there malice aforethought making it murder? Did the officer know the knee to the neck could/would kill this individual? He then made the move to do so and kept it there until death? IMO, the cop went way beyond just excessive force that resulted in death.

[3catcircus]

And therein is the difference, speeding can be an infraction, a misdemeanor, or a felony depending on circumstances, hence the LEO's discretion on your ticket. Possession of counterfeit currency is a felony no matter the circumstances. It is then up to the court to decide whether a crime has been committed.

So who's to blame for counterfeiting money that resulted in an encounter with the police to begin with?

There are multiple things that Floyd could have done differently to change the outcome. Don't do drugs. Don't pass funny money. Comply with the police officer's commands.

[Onkel Neal]

There are multiple things that Floyd could have done differently to change the outcome. Don't do drugs. Don't pass funny money. Comply with the police officer's commands.

Agree 100%. But that is a separate issue in relation to the officer's stupid move.

[Buddahaid]

Guilty of all charges.

[Rockstar]

So who's to blame for counterfeiting money that resulted in an encounter with the police to begin with?


George Floyd is not on trial, he's dead. We'll never know if he was to blame because he will never have the same opportunity as Chauvin to defend himself.


There are multiple things that Floyd could have done differently to change the outcome. Don't do drugs. Don't pass funny money. Comply with the police officer's commands.None of which have anything to do with the death of Floyd. The prosecution pointed out that it was because someone was not following procedure and training pressing their knee into the neck of a hancuffed and therefore compliant suspect. If you watched the video you would see that even a nine year old girl knew that as did 8 other eyewitnesses. I saw the video and came to the same conclusion as that nine year old child.

They also pointed out that when police take custody of a person they assume responsiblity for the health and welfare of the suspect.

[Commander Wallace]

So who's to blame for counterfeiting money that resulted in an encounter with the police to begin with?

There are multiple things that Floyd could have done differently to change the outcome. Don't do drugs. Don't pass funny money. Comply with the police officer's commands.

Here is another flaw in your logic. Do you have some evidence we don't know about regarding the alleged fake $20 bill. By the way, where is that alleged bill anyhow ? If George Floyd did pass a fake bill, did George know it was fake ? Was evidence turned up that showed George Floyd had a printing press and was manufacturing them? It's unreasonable to believe George Floyd just manufactured one fake $20. Why not a $50 or a $100

You or I or anyone else could have unknowingly passed a fake bill and never knew it ? Be honest, do you inspect every bill you have or get. Would you know what to look for ?

If in fact, George Floyd did pass a fake bill, then an arrest would be appropriate. This guarantees those accused of a crime are given their day in court for the State, I repeat, the State to prove their case. The state has the burden of proof, not the individual. I seem to remember reading somewhere that U.S citizens have the right to due process

You seem to think it's okay for police to act as judge, jury and executioner. Well,apparently the jury that convicted Chauvin of on all counts didn't buy into your incredibly biased logic as none of us will either.

[3catcircus]

George Floyd is not on trial, he's dead. We'll never know if he was to blame because he will never have the same opportunity as Chauvin to defend himself.


None of which have anything to do with the death of Floyd. The prosecution pointed out that it was because someone was not following procedure and training pressing their knee into the neck of a hancuffed and therefore compliant suspect. If you watched the video you would see that even a nine year old girl knew that as did 8 other eyewitnesses. I saw the video and came to the same conclusion as that nine year old child.

They also pointed out that when police take custody of a person they assume responsiblity for the health and welfare of the suspect.

The encounter would not have occurred if Floyd hadn't have pass funny money. The encounter might have been peaceful had he not resisted arrest. His cardiovascular system might not have failed had he not had 3x as much fentanyl as is considered lethal. Floyd controlled whether or not he encountered law enforcement at all that day.

This'll get overturned on appeal. That the verdict came back guilty to begin with is evidence that the jury was terrified of having their houses vandalized or of being attacked. Enjoy mob rule.

[3catcircus]

What you fail to understand is that in law, there is a simple tenant there you take people where you find them. Look it up. Does it take 4 officers to to hold down someone who is already restrained and handcuffed ? I think not. By most accounts, George Floyd was probably dead for 3 minutes before Chauvin took his knee off his Floyd's neck.

Even the pulmonary Physcian who testified stated that a healthy person could not withstand the amount of pressure that Chauvin used in this arrest. This tells me your drug argument is without merit.

Even Chauvin's own officers crossed " the thin blue line " to condemn Chauvin's actions. I think this was a bit of damage control on behalf of the police dept there. However, fantasies and smoke screens won't change the fact that Floyd was murdered. Pure and simple.

The evidence was crystal-clear that Chsuvin's knee was in his shoulder/back nowhere near an area that would restrict his breathing or heart function alone. A severely depressed cardiovascular system in someine with cardiovascular disease is going to lead to a bad outcome when that person exerts themselves resisting arrest.

Regardless of your health situation, if you just behave when being arrested you won't end up dying.

[Commander Wallace]

The evidence was crystal-clear that Chsuvin's knee was in his shoulder/back nowhere near an area that would restrict his breathing or heart function alone. A severely depressed cardiovascular system in someine with cardiovascular disease is going to lead to a bad outcome when that person exerts themselves resisting arrest.

Regardless of your health situation, if you just behave when being arrested you won't end up dying.


Apparently you didn't read or understand what I said. A healthy person will die from having their oxygen cut off. The Physicians have said the same thing. Again, in law, you take people as they are. Chauvin killed Floyd and has now been convicted.

[Buddahaid]

Re: 3catcircus That wasn't the coroner's finding.

[3catcircus]

Re: 3catcircus That wasn't the coroner's finding.

Really?

Here it is:

https://www.hennepin.us/-/media/hennepinus/residents/public-safety/documents/floyd-autopsy-6-3-20.pdf


"III. No life-threatening injuries identified No facial, oral mucosal, or conjunctival petechiae No injuries of anterior muscles of neck or laryngeal structures No scalp soft tissue, skull, or brain injuries No chest wall soft tissue injuries, rib fractures (other than a single rib fracture from CPR), vertebral column injuries, or visceral injuries Incision and subcutaneous dissection of posterior and lateral neck, shoulders, back, flanks, and buttocks negative for occult trauma"

"NECK: Layer by layer dissection of the anterior strap muscles of the neck discloses no areas of contusion or hemorrhage within the musculature. The thyroid cartilage and hyoid bone are intact. The larynx is lined by intact mucosa. The thyroid is symmetric and red-brown, without cystic or nodular change. The tongue is free of bite marks, hemorrhage, or other injuries. The cervical spinal column is palpably stable and free of hemorrhage. "


"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM: The right and left lungs weigh 1085 and 1015 g, respectively. The external surfaces are pink only on the most anterior aspects, and deep red-purple in all other areas. The pulmonary parenchyma is diffusely congested and edematous. No mass lesions or areas of consolidation are present. The pulmonary vascular tree is free of thromboemboli. The tracheobronchial tree is free of blood, edema fluid, or foreign material.

CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEM: The 540 g heart (upper limit of normal for body length is 510 g; upper limit of normal for body weight is 521 g)1 is contained in an intact pericardial sac. The epicardial surface is smooth, with modest fat investment. The coronary arteries are present in a normal distribution, with a right dominant pattern. Cross sections of the vessels show multifocal atherosclerosis, with 75% proximal and 75% mid narrowing of the left anterior descending coronary artery; 75% proximal narrowing of the 1st diagonal branch of the left anterior descending coronary artery; 25% proximal narrowing of the circumflex coronary artery; and 90% proximal narrowing of the right coronary artery. The myocardium is homogeneous, redbrown, and firm. The valve leaflets are thin and mobile. The walls of the left and right ventricles are 1.2 and 0.4 cm thick, respectively. The endocardium is smooth and glistening. Both ventricular cavities are mildly dilated. The minimally atherosclerotic aorta gives rise to three intact and patent arch vessels. The renal and mesenteric vessels are unremarkable. "

"MICROSCOPIC EXAMINATION: Cross sections of left ventricular, right ventricular, and interventricular septal myocardium are examined and show the expected microscopic architecture, with readily visible boxcar nuclear changes in the septal and left ventricular sections. Cross sections of coronary arteries, though not all ideally oriented, confirm the gross impression of atherosclerotic narrowing. Sections of right and left lung show generally normal overall architecture, without malignancy, pneumonia, granulomatous inflammation, or polarizable intravascular foreign material. Many small vessels contain rounded clear vacuoles, consistent with bone marrow embolism from cardiopulmonary resuscitation.'

I'll leave the rest for you to read through. The guy died of a fentanyl overdose-induced collapse of his already compromised cardiovascular system, exacerbated by overexertion while resisting arrest. 75% narrowing of the LAD - that's the artery that causes "widowmaker" heart attacks. 90% narrowing of the right artery. The guy's heart was practically a chunk of beef jerky (no doubt accelerated by his drug abuse).

[Rockstar]

The encounter would not have occurred if Floyd hadn't have pass funny money. The encounter might have been peaceful had he not resisted arrest. His cardiovascular system might not have failed had he not had 3x as much fentanyl as is considered lethal. Floyd controlled whether or not he encountered law enforcement at all that day.

This'll get overturned on appeal. That the verdict came back guilty to begin with is evidence that the jury was terrified of having their houses vandalized or of being attacked. Enjoy mob rule.


I watched the trial I didnt see anyone present anything close to what you just said. I have my opinion but Im also well aware that guilt or innocence is in the hands of the jury and I will accept their verdict over mine yours or anyone elses opinion.



It is also my opinion when you are hand cuffed in the back their is no threat one can offer. Oh you can squirm, bitch and complain all you want but thats not a threat. Neither is trying to roll over or get up because you cant breath.

[3catcircus]

Apparently you didn't read or understand what I said. A healthy person will die from having their oxygen cut off. The Physicians have said the same thing. Again, in law, you take people as they are. Chauvin killed Floyd and has now been convicted.

See my response to buddahaid - the coroner report shows no such thing happened.

Whether or not Chauvin is bad at his job is irrelevant as to whether or not he is a murderer. The jury ignored the facts, acted on emotion, and now this case will be overturned on appeal.

[3catcircus]

I watched the trial I didnt see anyone present anything close to what you just said. I have my opinion but Im also well aware that guilt or innocence is in the hands of the jury and I will accept their verdict over mine yours or anyone elses opinion.

It's all in the coroner's report. You have to be willing to find it, read it, and understand the medical language in it. I'm betting the jury lacked the capacity for that or was specifically prevented from doing so.

[Buddahaid]

My mistake. The medical examiner called it homicide.

[Rockstar]

It's all in the coroner's report. You have to be willing to find it, read it, and understand the medical language in it. I'm betting the jury lacked the capacity for that or was specifically prevented from doing so.


Actually I was listening to the trial lawyers make heads or tails of it all. I seem to recall the words homocide, strong heart. I wonder if the stress would have reduced had Chauvin got off of Floyd and rollex him on his side so he could breath?

[3catcircus]

My mistake. The medical examiner called it homicide.

This is an important legal distinction. Not all homicides are murder, but all murders are homicides.

Every time a police officer fires on a suspect and kills then, it's a homicide. Even when the facts show it was a good shooting.

[3catcircus]

Actually I was listening to the trial lawyers make heads or tails of it all. I seem to recall the words homocide, strong heart. I wonder if the stress would have reduced had Chauvin got off of Floyd and rollex him on his side so he could breath?

I'll reiterate. Not all homicide Is murder.

The coroner's report clearly shows he was in heart failure with 75+% narrowing of multiple coronary arteries.

I'm surprised no one brought up the fact that pressure on your upper back in the shoulder region doesn't cause loss of oxygen, but pressure on the abdomen affecting the ability to inflate the diaphragm most certainly does as being of importance here. Which is exactly why the hold he was using didn't cause death since the knee was on the shoulder. The additional camera angles introduced into evidence clearly illustrates this.

https://rumble.com/vfeejx-new-alternate-camera-angle-blows-massive-hole-in-george-floyd-narrative.html

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/victoria-taft/2021/04/08/officer-chauvins-knee-was-not-on-george-floyds-neck-and-8-other-things-you-didnt-know-about-this-case-n1438360

You want to claim involuntary manslaughter? I might have to agree. But it's definitely not murder.

[Commander Wallace]

See my response to buddahaid - the coroner report shows no such thing happened.

Whether or not Chauvin is bad at his job is irrelevant as to whether or not he is a murderer. The jury ignored the facts, acted on emotion, and now this case will be overturned on appeal.

Overturned on appeal ? Well, if you are going to dream, dream big.

Once again, medical experts , I repeat, medical experts testified that the level of force used by Chavin would have killed a healthy person. This information clearly invalidates your drug use logic. Further, the video clearly shows Chauvin putting force on Floyd's neck. The professional medical personnel have expertise in these matters and testified to this effect.


The jury has determined Derek Chavin is a murderer. You can debate it to to your hearts content. You are in the minority, so you know. One other thing. I bet if you were the one being murdered on the street, you would have wanted help and wouldn't feel as you do now. This could have been you or anyone of us here.


A diverse jury of his peers has concluded Derek Chauvin is a murderer. That's good enough for me as Chauvin got the day in court he clearly denied George Floyd.

[Platapus]

Some people will be arguing about this case for a long time.



A verdict that disagrees with your opinion is not necessarily a bad verdict.



In MN any conviction of a felony that results in a sentence can be appealed (MN Court Rule 28). So it is almost guaranteed that there will be an appeal.


In MN, as in some other states, there are actually two different types of appeals. There is an appeal for conviction and an appeal for sentence.


I am sure they will be going for an appeal for conviction first.



However, an appeal does not suspend sentence unless a judge specifically grants a suspension.


The rules for appeal in MN can get quite complicated.



So this show is far from over.

[3catcircus]

Overturned on appeal ? Well, if you are going to dream, dream big.

Once again, medical experts , I repeat, medical experts testified that the level of force used by Chavin would have killed a healthy person. This information clearly invalidates your drug use logic. Further, the video clearly shows Chauvin putting force on Floyd's neck. The professional medical personnel have expertise in these matters and testified to this effect.


The jury has determined Derek Chavin is a murderer. You can debate it to to your hearts content. You are in the minority, so you know. One other thing. I bet if you were the one being murdered on the street, you would have wanted help and wouldn't feel as you do now. This could have been you or anyone of us here.


A diverse jury of his peers has concluded Derek Chauvin is a murderer. That's good enough for me as Chauvin got the day in court he clearly denied George Floyd.

Both the defense and the prosecution presented expert testimony that contradicted they other side's.

As the drug use logic? The coroner's report showing him having 11 ng/ml fentanyl in his system at the time of death (when a typical fentanyl patch delivers a peak of 3.8 ng/ml and a transmucosal dose delivers a peak of 2.1 ng/ml) leads to either a significant tolerance due to prolonged drug abuse or the logical conclusion that he swallowed the fentanyl he bought off of his drug dealer to avoid it being seized as evidence.

Did you read the coroner's report? "Signs associated with fentanyl toxicity include severe respiratory depression, seizures, hypotension, coma and death. In fatalities from fentanyl, blood concentrations are variable and have been reported as low as 3 ng/mL."

Or the 86 ng/ml of free morphine when a 100mg morphine dose gives a serum concentration of *half" of that, as will add the fact that it is a metabolite of heroin.

I may be in the minority on this - given the general lack of education, impulse control, or critical thinking skills of the public who react emotionally to pavlovian media stimulus, being in the minority on this isn't a bad thing...

As to if it were me "being murdered," that would be a highly unlikely situation - I don't do illegal drugs, I don't pass counterfeit money, and I'm going to comply with police officers if detained and fight them in court instead.

No one is denying that Floyd died while the police were trying to arrest him. It just doesn't meet the definition of murder.

[3catcircus]

Some people will be arguing about this case for a long time.



A verdict that disagrees with your opinion is not necessarily a bad verdict.



In MN any conviction of a felony that results in a sentence can be appealed (MN Court Rule 28). So it is almost guaranteed that there will be an appeal.


In MN, as in some other states, there are actually two different types of appeals. There is an appeal for conviction and an appeal for sentence.


I am sure they will be going for an appeal for conviction first.



However, an appeal does not suspend sentence unless a judge specifically grants a suspension.


The rules for appeal in MN can get quite complicated.



So this show is far from over.

An interesting question will be whether or not Maxine Waters, Sleepy Joe, or the governor of MN improperly influenced the trial.

It also will be interesting to see if there were procedural issues because the prosecution was performed including private lawyers state prosecutors. Conflict of interest and whether or not they were acting as agents of the state might come up. Who knows.

Either way, the mobs will continue to riot.

[MaDef]

An interesting question will be whether or not Maxine Waters, Sleepy Joe, or the governor of MN improperly influenced the trial. I'll be watching that with interest, the trial judge seemed to think it might be grounds for an appeal.

[Commander Wallace]

Both the defense and the prosecution presented expert testimony that contradicted they other side's.

As the drug use logic? The coroner's report showing him having 11 ng/ml fentanyl in his system at the time of death (when a typical fentanyl patch delivers a peak of 3.8 ng/ml and a transmucosal dose delivers a peak of 2.1 ng/ml) leads to either a significant tolerance due to prolonged drug abuse or the logical conclusion that he swallowed the fentanyl he bought off of his drug dealer to avoid it being seized as evidence.

Did you read the coroner's report? "Signs associated with fentanyl toxicity include severe respiratory depression, seizures, hypotension, coma and death. In fatalities from fentanyl, blood concentrations are variable and have been reported as low as 3 ng/mL."

.


George Floyds drug use or alleged drug use is irrelevant. I repeat, it's irrelevant, for the reasons I listed above. Better still, Chavin was recorded saying he thought Floyd may have been on drugs. Why then did Chauvin act as he did. You want everyone to forget about the video that exists

You need a better understanding of the law. Further, Chauvin never tried to administer aid as he was required to do. A jury of his peers convicted Chauvin.


Btw, I'm sure I have a better legal understanding than your own. I'm certain of it.

[3catcircus]

George Floyds drug use or alleged drug use is irrelevant. I repeat, it's irrelevant, for the reasons I listed above. Better still, Chavin was recorded saying he thought Floyd may have been on drugs. Why then did Chauvin act as he did. You want everyone to forget about the video that exists

You need a better understanding of the law. Further, Chauvin never tried to administer aid as he was required to do. A jury of his peers convicted Chauvin.


Btw, I'm sure I have a better legal understanding than your own. I'm certain of it.

Feel free to believe whatever you want. It doesn't change the fact that a drug-abusing criminal with a heart condition was combative while police were attempting to arrest him and suffered a heart attack while being subdued. And that the prosecution had to quickly change from using the word "neck" to "neck area" when confronted with proof that Chauvin's knee was on his shoulder rather than his neck (noting that it's still possible the his knee slipped to his neck while Floyd was flailing about.)

A guy not high and combative would've been quickly placed in cuffs and instead of wasting time, he could have then been medically evaluated.

While we all feel bad for Floyd and his family, his actions are what led to the encounter with the police in the first place, and his combative nature during that encounter led to the police having to apply subdual holds. His heart condition, exertion while resisting, and fatal levels of fentanyl leading to a heart attack are of more significance as a primary cause rather than a knee laid into a shoulder. Is it negligence or involuntary manslaughter? Possibly. But it isn't murder. No premeditation. No intent to cause death. No depraved mind. No heat of passion. The only statute that seemingly applies in MN is manslaughter 2 due to the culpable negligence creating an unreasonable risk phrasing of the statute. And even then it's dicey - no law enforcement officer can be expected to diagnose a heart condition (or know that the person recently had covid). It also doesn't mean that Chauvin is a good guy. He sounds like a complete tool. It still doesn't equal murder.

[Buddahaid]

The first video in the thread shows the knee on the neck which is not just casually slipping now and then.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VZS0H-636g

[3catcircus]

The first video in the thread shows the knee on the neck which is not just casually slipping now and then.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VZS0H-636g

And this view, which the media conveniently chose to ignore until it was presented at trial, refutes that.

https://rumble.com/vfeejx-new-alternate-camera-angle-blows-massive-hole-in-george-floyd-narrative.html

It's entirely possible that it appears to be his neck when, in fact, It was his shoulder, based upon camera angle, elevation, and parallax. Which is what this video shows, and to which was testified to.

[Buddahaid]

And this view, which the media conveniently chose to ignore until it was presented at trial, refutes that.

https://rumble.com/vfeejx-new-alternate-camera-angle-blows-massive-hole-in-george-floyd-narrative.html

It's entirely possible that it appears to be his neck when, in fact, It was his shoulder, based upon camera angle, elevation, and parallax. Which is what this video shows, and to which was testified to.

It appears to me that Floyd is already dead in those moments shown before being loaded on the gurney. He is no longer moving, or struggling, and it does nothing to refute the claim.

[Commander Wallace]

Feel free to believe whatever you want. It doesn't change the fact that a drug-abusing criminal with a heart condition was combative while police were attempting to arrest him and suffered a heart attack while being subdued. And that the prosecution had to quickly change from using the word "neck" to "neck area" when confronted with proof that Chauvin's knee was on his shoulder rather than his neck (noting that it's still possible the his knee slipped to his neck while Floyd was flailing about.)

A guy not high and combative would've been quickly placed in cuffs and instead of wasting time, he could have then been medically evaluated.

While we all feel bad for Floyd and his family, his actions are what led to the encounter with the police in the first place, and his combative nature during that encounter led to the police having to apply subdual holds. His heart condition, exertion while resisting, and fatal levels of fentanyl leading to a heart attack are of more significance as a primary cause rather than a knee laid into a shoulder. Is it negligence or involuntary manslaughter? Possibly. But it isn't murder. No premeditation. No intent to cause death. No depraved mind. No heat of passion. The only statute that seemingly applies in MN is manslaughter 2 due to the culpable negligence creating an unreasonable risk phrasing of the statute. And even then it's dicey - no law enforcement officer can be expected to diagnose a heart condition (or know that the person recently had covid). It also doesn't mean that Chauvin is a good guy. He sounds like a complete tool. It still doesn't equal murder.


You are also free to believe as you choose. I'm fully aware that not everyone will feel the same regarding the outcome of the the Derek Chauvin trial. That being said, the D.A's office filed the charges they felt were appropriate given the circumstances and also the charges they believed they could prove at the time of the trial.

The line up of medical experts, who have a better understanding than you or I testified that Floyd died from having his oxygen supply cut off. I heard further medical testimony in which it was stated that a healthy person would have died under the same circumstances. I have not the faintest Idea why you can't seem to grasp that.

Therefore, it's irrelevant that George Floyd had drugs in his system. It's irrelevant that George Floyd had medical conditions. Did it not ever occur to you that the vast majority of the general public has one health condition or another ? Decent police officers know this and deal with it on a daily basis. How many times did George Floyd say that he couldn't breath ? Any decent human being would have backed off at that point.

Why did it take 4 officers to hold down a suspect with his hands handcuffed behind his back ? Why couldn't George Floyd have been handcuffed and sat on the ground with his legs straight out ? Try putting your hands behind you and getting up from the ground in a seated position. That would have sufficed.

You have said that there is no premeditation. Chauvin and Floyd had both worked together in security for a nightclub. It was never mentioned at trial as it wasn't deemed relevant. How do you or anyone else know that Chauvin didn't have it in for Floyd and that this encounter wasn't an elaborate setup ?

I don't think Chauvin or Floyd are poster boys for the cream of society. That being said, everyone should enjoy the same protection under the law. While Floyd may or may not have been cooperative, This does not give police departments discretionary rights to act as judge, jury and executioner. I fully expect to see Chauvin file an appeal.

An appeal isn't necessarily filed because the defense doesn't like a decision.The defense will have to cite an error in the process to prevail. It appears to me that the judge and prosecution went to great lengths to make this difficult.

Again,your opinion is in the minority.

Consider this bill that may be enacted into law by Congress.


H.R.7120 - George Floyd Justice in Policing Act of 2020

https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/7120

[3catcircus]

You are also free to believe as you choose. I'm fully aware that not everyone will feel the same regarding the outcome of the the Derek Chauvin trial. That being said, the D.A's office filed the charges they felt were appropriate given the circumstances and also the charges they believed they could prove at the time of the trial.

The line up of medical experts, who have a better understanding than you or I testified that Floyd died from having his oxygen supply cut off. I heard further medical testimony in which it was stated that a healthy person would have died under the same circumstances. I have not the faintest Idea why you can't seem to grasp that.

Therefore, it's irrelevant that George Floyd had drugs in his system. It's irrelevant that George Floyd had medical conditions. Did it not ever occur to you that the vast majority of the general public has one health condition or another ? Decent police officers know this and deal with it on a daily basis. How many times did George Floyd say that he couldn't breath ? Any decent human being would have backed off at that point.

Why did it take 4 officers to hold down a suspect with his hands handcuffed behind his back ? Why couldn't George Floyd have been handcuffed and sat on the ground with his legs straight out ? Try putting your hands behind you and getting up from the ground in a seated position.

You have said that there is no premeditation. Chauvin and Floyd had both worked together in security for a nightclub. It was never mention at trial as it wasn't deemed relevant. How do you or anyone else know that Chauvin didn't have it in for Floyd and that this wasn't an elaborate setup ?

I don't think Chauvin or Floyd are poster boys for the cream of society. That being said, everyone should enjoy the same protection under the law. While Floyd may or may not have been cooperative, This does not give police departments discretionary rights to act as judge, jury and executioner. I fully expect to see Chauvin file an appeal.

An appeal isn't necessarily filed because the defense doesn't like a decision.The defense will have to cite an error in the process to prevail. It appears to me that the judge and prosecution went to great lengths to make this difficult.

Again,your opinion is in the minority.

Consider this bill that may be enacted into law by Congress.


H.R.7120 - George Floyd Justice in Policing Act of 2020

https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/7120

I understand what you are saying. I disagree that the drugs and heart condition are irrelevant. I might have missed it in the reporting, but I don't think that the prosecution experts you are referring to were challenged on their assertions that a healthy person would have also died, in light of the video showing knee on shoulder vice neck. *That's* the important distinction. I tend to believe the video showing knee on shoulder rather than neck, in light of past experience which shows that video evidence is misconstrued *specifically* because of camera angle, light conditions, and parallax.

So - a healthy person would *not* have died as a result of a knee in the shoulder or back, whereas someone with a compromised cardiovascular system who had lethal levels of drugs that further depress the cardiovascular system would. And they, in fact, would be more likely to have difficulty breathing regardless of physical position. Floyd kept complaining that he was having trouble breathing before he was proned out. That he was carrying on claiming he couldn't breath, that he was going to die, etc. etc. from the moment they asked him to step out of his car is something that police officers have seen over and over again from suspects as typical stall tactics to try and avoid an inevitable arrest, leading them to believe that his later complaints were more of the same. I also expect that, had the other 3 officers not had to have performed crowd control to avoid attack from a mob, they could and would have been able to monitor Floyd's condition and identify that he was actually in distress and not continuing stalling his arrest.

Again, an unfortunate situation all around, but nothing in their actions meets the definition of murder on the MN statutes.

The bigger question is how to deal with a portion of the populace that thinks it is acceptable to resist police officers enforcing laws. The police might not even agree with the law, but they are doing the bidding of the citizens whose duly-elected representatives enacted the laws. The thought experiment needs to consider where we would be at if criminals doing criminal things didn't do additional criminal things when caught...

[Rockstar]

est.

Again, an unfortunate situation all around, but nothing in their actions meets the definition of murder on the MN statutes.



I beg to differ, the State of Minnesota is the one which charged the officer with 2nd degree murder. I figure if anyone would know more about MN statutes it would be the State prosecutors office that won the case.

[Rockstar]

What bugs me is nothing in tbe trial indicated this was racially motivated. Race was not even a subject brought up at the trial. Use of force policy was though.



Yet race is the only thing all the Bidenettes are talking about.


Never mind, need for more, training, funding, performance reviews, and the militarization of police, which affects every citizen. That would shine the light on the politcians and they dont want that.

[mapuc]

Trying to get the head and tail in all this-Did the police officers acting kill Floyd ?
If yes was this the reason he got a 2nd degree murder verdict ?

Why does I have the feeling that this police officer is a victim of a political fox play.

I do not defend him...he made some wrong moves and should be punished for these-but he shouldn't be the center of all police brutality that has occurred the last 1-2 decades.
I feel he is a society scapegoat(can't find a better word)

Markus

[Buddahaid]

Regardless of what you believe caused the death, the police report is misleading.

https://youtu.be/KFfH2UCfJ7E

[3catcircus]

I beg to differ, the State of Minnesota is the one which charged the officer with 2nd degree murder. I figure if anyone would know more about MN statutes it would be the State prosecutors office that won the case.

Here are the relevant statutes:

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.18 (defines premeditation)
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.185 (murder 1)
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.19 (murder 2)
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.195 (murder 3)
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.20 (manslaughter 1)
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.205 (manslaughter 2)

Murder 1 requires premeditation and intent.
Murder 2 requires intent unless it was unintentional while in the process of committing another felony or by a person who has a restraining order
Murder 3 requires depraved mind - which legally means he had to have been judged morally lacking - which means he should never have been hired as a police officer to begin with.
Manslaughter 1 requires intent while in the heat off passion - he wasn't charged with 5th degree assault, in which case MS1 wouldn't need intent.
Manslaughter 2 requires culpable negligence - i.e. "he should've known better."

The murder 3 was initially thrown out before an speaks cost reinstated it.

For unintentional murder 2, he should have been charged with whatever felony he was alleged to be in the process of committing.

The only one that logically applies is MS2. They never established intent, premeditation, etc.

This is a case of an overcharge by a politically-motivated AG, relying upon an uneducated jury to not understand the charges and to react emotionally to prosecution testimony.

Don't get me wrong, Chauvin no saint. But, between prosecutorial overcharge, what appears to potentially be an inadequate defense in light of the reinstatement of the murder 3 charge, and interference by politicians, this will be going to appeal.

Doesn't matter though, since the mob is gonna riot no matter what.

[kozel1]

This was 2nd degree manslaughter. How can he be charged and convicted with 2nd degree murder? Was it proven beyond reasonable doubt that he intended to kill the victim?

[3catcircus]

This was 2nd degree manslaughter. How can he be charged and convicted with 2nd degree murder? Was it proven beyond reasonable doubt that he intended to kill the victim?

It was unintentional murder 2, which doesnt require intent, but it does require him to have been committing a 1st/2nd degree felony offense with force/violence or a drive-by shooting, or to be a person with a restraining order who is attempting bodily harm on the person who obtained the restraining order.

So, it seems that they levied unintentional murder 2 *because* of the manslaughter 2, claiming the manslaughter was with force/violence, solely as a way to stack charges hoping one of them stuck. A jury member isn't going to be sophisticated enough to understand this for what it is.

[Rockstar]

The trial is over and the man was convicted by a jury of his peers. I take no joy in it. I still thought State prosecutors did their job convincing the jury. I watch every bit I could and they convinced me and I wasnt in the court room.


What the prosecutors presented was an ugly truth that most still refuse to acknowledge. Instead degenerates dance in the streets over racism when there was none. While others like Trump discredit the courts and laws.



What happened was nobody gave a damn about Chauvin until it was too late. He spent his entire career doing a job none of you degenerates could. None of you can hold a candle to what he and others like him do. While you sit in your mothers basements taking up causes. He did his duty he did the job you are afraid to do. He saw the worst of what humanity had to offer everyday. He made it possible for you degenerates to walk outside at night. And none of you ungratful degenerates asked or gave a crap how these brave men and women deal with it.

[3catcircus]

The trial is over and the man was convicted by a jury of his peers. I take no joy in it. I still thought State prosecutors did their job convincing the jury. I watch every bit I could and they convinced me and I wasnt in the court room.


What the prosecutors presented was an ugly truth that most still refuse to acknowledge. Instead degenerates dance in the streets over racism when there was none. While others like Trump discredit the courts and laws.



What happened was nobody gave a damn about Chauvin until it was too late. He spent his entire career doing a job none of you degenerates could. None of you can hold a candle to what he and others like him do. While you sit in your mothers basements taking up causes. He did his duty he did the job you are afraid to do. He saw the worst of what humanity had to offer everyday. He made it possible for you degenerates to walk outside at night. And none of you ungratful degenerates asked or gave a crap how these brave men and women deal with it.

I tend to agree wholeheartedly with this. The only sticky issue is that going from having to deal with social parasites to becoming a vigilante is a very fine line and even cops with the best of intentions can find themselves crossing over that line out of a sense of frustration.

We wouldn't be in this situation to begin with if society were willing to confront the ugly truth about certain sectors of the population for whom criminal activity is endemic and generational.

So - we have new cops for whom Floyd was uncontrollable resulting in Chauvin having to assist. We have a seasoned cop who is tired if freaking with the same scum over and over again because arrests aren't prosecuted or they plea down, resulting in a revolving door of criminal activity. We have a police department full of "leaders" who are anything but. We have politicians unduly influencing criminal charges and a prosecution. We have a bunch of antifa animal savages rioting even though they got the verdict they demanded. The people in MSP are no safer than they were before Chauvin charged.

We all know what the problem is, but leaders refuse to address it because they don't want to be unfairly accused of "racism" even though antisocial behavior holds no race or class distinction.

The *only* way to resolve this is for government to direct police to shoot to kill every looter/rioter and to *directly* confront antisocial behavior with harsh measures. The challenge is how to do so without jumping to conclusions and having undeniable proof before taking action in addressing antisocial behavior.

Example - Philadelphia's Kensington Ave open air drug market can easily be cleaned up, but it requires law enforcement to roust every vagrant. It requires city sanitation workers to clean streets. It requires law enforcement to endlessly harass drug dealers and customers, arresting them at every turn. It requires prosecutors to bring charges and refuse to plea bargain. It won't happen because of a combination of institutional laziness and corruption in city government, with several drug dealers bribing officials along the way.

What it boils down to is moral people to demand that all of society act morally.

[August]

The *only* way to resolve this is for government to direct police to shoot to kill every looter/rioter and to *directly* confront antisocial behavior with harsh measures. The challenge is how to do so without jumping to conclusions and having undeniable proof before taking action in addressing antisocial behavior.


If our government tries that authoritarian crap with us you can pretty much guarantee a very bloody and protracted rebellion over it. The first time the cops start shooting at rioters they are going to shoot back and they might just have the numbers to prevail too. Then what are you going to do? Send in the military? A military assault with especially with tanks and artillery on an American city? How could the Republic ever survive?

[Buddahaid]

If our government tries that authoritarian crap with us you can pretty much guarantee a very bloody and protracted rebellion over it. The first time the cops start shooting at rioters they are going to shoot back and they might just have the numbers to prevail too. Then what are you going to do? Send in the military? A military assault with especially with tanks and artillery on an American city? How could the Republic ever survive?

It would be worse than Budapest in 1956.

[3catcircus]

If our government tries that authoritarian crap with us you can pretty much guarantee a very bloody and protracted rebellion over it. The first time the cops start shooting at rioters they are going to shoot back and they might just have the numbers to prevail too. Then what are you going to do? Send in the military? A military assault with especially with tanks and artillery on an American city? How could the Republic ever survive?

You make the mistake of assuming that rioters/looters are law-abiding citizens as opposed to the violent anarcho-fascists that they are - they are a cancer on society. These are people who are trapping police officers in buildings and setting them in fire; destroying businesses that don't pay protection money; that attack citizens in the streets.

If you need to invoke the insurrection act, so be it, but as it is right now, leftist sympathetic government officials have turned cities into something out of The Warriors movie...

This isn't a 1960s civil rights march. People don't understand that we're already undergoing a violent insurrectionist revolution in the streets combined with a color revolution in government.

[August]

You make the mistake of assuming that rioters/looters are law-abiding citizens as opposed to the violent anarcho-fascists that they are - they are a cancer on society. These are people who are trapping police officers in buildings and setting them in fire; destroying businesses that don't pay protection money; that attack citizens in the streets.

If you need to invoke the insurrection act, so be it, but as it is right now, leftist sympathetic government officials have turned cities into something out of The Warriors movie...

This isn't a 1960s civil rights march. People don't understand that we're already undergoing a violent insurrectionist revolution in the streets combined with a color revolution in government.


No I do not claim that rioters and looters are law abiding citizens, I understand that there are evil people trying to destabilize our country. I just know that it's wicked stupid to give our government the power to mow down masses of our fellow citizens in the streets just by declaring any assembly of people to be a riot and then opening fire. You have to know they will misuse it and abuse it like they misuse every other power we have given them whether through incompetence or evil intent or both. That is just too much.

[August]

It would be worse than Budapest in 1956.


Times how many cities is it also likely to be played out at the same time? It could be Budapest times 50.

[Catfish]

Worth posting i think



https://i.imgur.com/K90Fz32l.png

[3catcircus]

Worth posting i think



https://i.imgur.com/K90Fz32l.png

The problem here is that they didn't actually charge him with felony assault. His charge was murder 2 unintentional, murder 3, and manslaughter 2.

More and more it sounds like he had a terrible defense - a good defense attorney would have effectively put doubt in the mind of jurors with some type of argument like "if the prosecution claims he committed felony assault, they should have charged him with it. They didn't. So they can't now claim that he committed murder 2 unintentionally if they're not charging him with the crime they've claimed he committed to result in also charging him with murder 2."

This is typical prosecutorial overcharge. Throw the book at him hoping something sticks. Unfortunately, the jury system in the US is dead because your "peers" are all too often a mix of barely-functional illiterate mouth breathers who react emotionally instead of rationally and midwits who are more easily manipulated than they realize.

I've been excused from multiple juries because of my background and profession when the lawyers (from either side of the case) realize I am not an easily-swayed typical member of the jury pool. One of those cases involved a family sueing a nursing home because a family member suffered bed sores while in care. When the plaintiff's attorney passed around a series of Polaroids during jury selection, they paid very close attention to the reactions of the jury members. Those that reacted emotionally were tossed by the defense's lawyers if they were able to. Those that showed no emotion were tossed by the plaintiff's if they were able to. All because each sides attorney is trying to stack the jury with those they think they can more easily sway.

In the Chauvin trial, we can remake the film 12 Angry Men, with the new title of 12 F'ing Morons. He was found guilty on the same basis that OJ was found not guilty...

[kozel1]

So this was a kangaroo trial, the conviction happened based on intimidation, biased reporting from the media, emotions, public conviction a year ago when this all started. Why politicians put their nose in it encouraging the masses for riots if it didn't go their way?
Shame. Should've been a mistrial if you ask me.

[Onkel Neal]

What happened was nobody gave a damn about Chauvin until it was too late. He spent his entire career doing a job none of you degenerates could. None of you can hold a candle to what he and others like him do. While you sit in your mothers basements taking up causes. He did his duty he did the job you are afraid to do. He saw the worst of what humanity had to offer everyday. He made it possible for you degenerates to walk outside at night. And none of you ungratful degenerates asked or gave a crap how these brave men and women deal with it.

Easy there, take a step back. Just because someone on the forum disagrees with you, even if they are wrong, no cause for derogatory terms, my friend.

[Onkel Neal]

Worth posting i think



https://i.imgur.com/K90Fz32l.png

Thanks, that was helpful.

[3catcircus]

Thanks, that was helpful.

The issue is that unintentional murder 2 *isn't* appropriate - they should have actually charged him with the assault they're claiming he committed to warrant the murder 2 charge. If they wanted to argue that his manslaughter 2 was the charge that was being used to warrant the unintentional murder 2, they could have.

But they actually claimed felony assault as the crime being committed to result in unintentional murder - workout actually charging him with assault.

Murder 3 isn't appropriate because of the depraved mind requirement which would imply liability on MSP PD for hiring him in the first place, which would certainly make the PD, the city, and the state culpable. In fact, the trial judge actually threw it out before an appeals court (no doubt unduly pressured by the AG) reinstated it. Murder 3 requires depraved mind and disregard for human life - something that practically requires evidence of Snidely Whiplash mustache-twisting and diabolical laughter as he's restraining him.

The only charge that he is possibly guilty of is manslaughter 2 - if and only if his knee was actually on Floyd's neck causing loss of blood flow (the spine prevents compression of the trachea sufficient to prevent breathing in this position) or on his mid-back, preventing the diaphragm from doing it's job. The additional camera angles provide reasonable doubt since they show his knee on his shoulder. Especially if MSP PD trains the use of this restraint, given the camera footage showing he kept him on his stomach because of concern about him potentially coming out of his drug high in an "excited delirium" with superhuman strength - something that is highly likely to be illustrated in training rather than something a cop is going to just determine on his own.

Given Chauvin's history, it sounds like he should've been in a different line of work and/or had undiagnosed PTSD from his deployments in the army. It also appears he possibly has an appeal on an inadequate defense.

The real problem, however, is that jurors ignored reasonable doubt to convict based upon a bunch of irrelevant emotional testimony - *no one* on that jury should care about his brother's tearful testimony - that should have been allowed only during the sentencing. If the state of MN *really* wanted justice, they'd have tried Floyd's drug dealer.

The biggest tragedy is that Floyd's daughter won't see a dime of the pre-trial settlement with the city. I strongly doubt it'll be put into an irrevocable trust with laddered municipal bonds...

[Buddahaid]

You clearly choose to ignore the 45 seconds the knee is on Floyd's neck shown in the video I posted while Floyd was alive and focus on the 15 seconds you posted before an obviously unconscious Floyd gets picked up.

[vienna]

Chauvin's problems aren't over. yet; the DOJ is seriously considering filing charges related to a 2017 incident where Chauvin also used his knee to hold down an arrestee for 17 minutes, in a manner strikingly similar to the Floyd death; the base fact is Chauvin is a classic example of the "bad apple" who, by his actions, brings a lot of unfair shame to the law enforcement community; he is one of those cops who exceed the norms o humane conduct and manages to escape responsibility due to the sort of 'sweep it under the rug' CYA seen in an awful lot of police departments and in a ot of local governments; Chauvin is not, by any means, a chior boy, and, given his past history of violence, it is indeed not a little shocking he managed to continue on as an officer in any competent, responsible, accountable police department...


Derek Chauvin used force against suspects before George Floyd. The jury won't hear about 6 of those incidents. --

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2021/04/01/derek-chauvin-trial-past-violence-force-arrestee-george-floyd/7020506002/


After Chauvin's conviction for Floyd murder, DOJ weighs charging him for 2017 incident involving Black teen: Source --

https://abcnews.go.com/US/chauvins-conviction-floyd-murder-doj-weighs-charging-2017/story?id=77254006


...however, sometimes, though delayed, an injustice involving "bad apple" cops; a 19 year veteran patrol officer from Buffalo, NY was vindicated in her efforts to overturn an unjust firing from the force following her intervention to prevent a rogue officer from brutalizing an arrestee...


Former Buffalo police officer who was fired for stopping a colleague's chokehold vindicated in court --

https://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens/as-it-happens-wednesday-edition-1.5987102/former-buffalo-police-officer-who-was-fired-for-stopping-a-colleague-s-chokehold-vindicated-in-court-1.5987108



...it must have been galling for Horne to have been treated so dismissively by the very department for which she had served for so long; I have found no reports on Horne that indicate any record of other serious disciplinary actions against her, so it would seem her main 'crime', in the eyes of the Buffalo PD, was she open intervened and stopped a brutalization and that the offending officer took umbrage and filed his own charges against her; it is particularly glaring that the offending officer not only got away with ruining the career and reputation of Horne, even with his significantly less than shining record, he was actually promoted to a senior position within the department; it kind of makes you wonder if there are any responsible adults running that force...


Just today, the local news is reporting on an incident in the City of Westminster, Orange County, CA, that happened this past Wednesday, where an officer was caught on tape punching a handcuffed and non-aggressive arrestee twice in the face; in this case, two other officers on the scene very quickly intervened and stopped the offending officer from any further attack on the arrestee; it was good to see those two officers do the right thing and step in...


Westminster police officer on paid leave after video shows him punching female assault suspect --

https://ktla.com/news/local-news/westminster-police-officer-on-paid-leave-after-video-shows-him-punching-assault-suspect-other-officers-intervened/


Now, i guess, the taxpayers are gonna have to foot the bill, not only for the offending officers legal costs, but also for what will be yet another payout by the city government for the arrestees damage claims; somehow, isn't it a bit puzzling that local governments and their PDs haven't quite caught on to the fact it is very often cheaper to get rid of the 'bad apples' than it si to pay out whopping sums in court claims?; but then, again, it really isn't their money...


...its just ours, the taxpayers...






<O>

[mapuc]

< In a Swedish article it stood that DOJ had started an investigation on the entire police force in Minneapolis

Markus

[Onkel Neal]

The US saw significant crime rise across major cities in 2020. And it's not letting up (https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/03/us/us-crime-rate-rise-2020/index.html)

My thoughts to the police: step back and allow society to work it out. Don't get caught in a situation where doing your job and enforcing the law will get you incarcerated.

[3catcircus]

Translation: Let the "community" police itself as the cretins kill each other.

[Rockstar]

First 8 minutes is about dealing with COVID. But the meat and potatoes regarding their opinion about police and the Bidenette race baiters starts @8:50



https://youtu.be/X0H4M5uP_y8

[Rockstar]

Easy there, take a step back. Just because someone on the forum disagrees with you, even if they are wrong, no cause for derogatory terms, my friend.




Sorry everyone.

[Onkel Neal]

Translation: Let the "community" police itself as the cretins kill each other.

Amen. And any that wander into real America and commit assaults, murder, and robbery, lock them up and throw away the key.

“Yes, well, look, we’re not going to have a riot. People are in a good mood,” Maher said to awkward laughter. “Well, the good news in the Derek Chauvin trial: they found him guilty. So, there was justice for George Floyd. The bad news? If you want something from Foot Locker this weekend, you’re going to have to buy it with money.”

[August]

Amen. And any that wander into real America and commit assaults, murder, and robbery, lock them up and throw away the key.




Will you allow them to send out the women and children first? :)

[Moonlight]

Will you allow them to send out the women and children first? :)

Oh bollocks to that August you've got to tar them all with the same brush, it's got to be, "All For One And One For All" type of scenario just like that movie called "The Purge".

How long will it last then Onkel?, a day, a week, a month?, will citizens from other countries be able to get stuck in as well and also help cleanse your infected streets?. This purge thingie is just another knee jerk reaction from impotent citizens who are watching their towns and cities degenerate before their very eyes.

There's a solution you haven't covered yet and that is to get rid of your local politicians who are bleeding rubbish and then move on to the real bleeding political wankers of the USA, they are your problem, not the criminals.
The streets will be safer when those politicians are not allowed to stomp all over the police and are also stopped from appeasing these militant political groups you've stirred up these last few years.
Let the police do there job for once without any hindrance from any one and you'll have a legal purge instead, you see, any muppet can come up with brain dead ideas but it takes bollocks to implement them and your current politicians are lacking in that department.

[Jeff-Groves]

I always say just arm the Gangs and leave town.
Let them sort it out then come in and clean up.

Not that that would ever work.
Most of the Gangs would bail out as they are pretty much cowards that do drive byes and couldn't hit a target 100 foot away with a full auto gun anyway.

A purge, as in the movies, would find most people hidden away.
So your intended targets would be behind MaMa.
MaMa is totally innocent so do We chop her down?

I say set the bad free with a condition.
We drop them on the Antarctica continent with minimal supplies.
Should they make it to a given point? You get a probation.
Would make a great TV show!

[Onkel Neal]

Will you allow them to send out the women and children first? :)

The women, must be screened and preapproved.

[3catcircus]

I always say just arm the Gangs and leave town.
Let them sort it out then come in and clean up.

Not that that would ever work.
Most of the Gangs would bail out as they are pretty much cowards that do drive byes and couldn't hit a target 100 foot away with a full auto gun anyway.

A purge, as in the movies, would find most people hidden away.
So your intended targets would be behind MaMa.
MaMa is totally innocent so do We chop her down?

I say set the bad free with a condition.
We drop them on the Antarctica continent with minimal supplies.
Should they make it to a given point? You get a probation.
Would make a great TV show!

I just got visions of "Warrioorrsss... Come out and playyyy-aaa-aaayy!!"

[Onkel Neal]

This retired cop just delivered the interview of the year and BBC was not ready :03:

Two parts

https://notthebee.com/article/this-retired-cop-just-delivered-the-interview-of-the-year

[3catcircus]

This retired cop just delivered the interview of the year and BBC was not ready :03:

Two parts

https://notthebee.com/article/this-retired-cop-just-delivered-the-interview-of-the-year

Bravo!

[Onkel Neal]

In a post published yesterday, Phil asked in a sarcastic tone whether the police should “somehow treat teenage knife fights as they would harmless roughhousing and simply ignore it.” My answer to this is: Yes, that’s exactly what they should do — yes, even if they are explicitly called to the scene. I don’t know where Phil grew up, but where I spent my childhood, Fridays were idyllic: We’d play some football, try a little Super Mario Bros, have a quick knife fight, and then fire up some frozen pizza before bed. And now law enforcement is getting involved? This is political correctness gone mad.

:Kaleun_Applaud:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/04/in-defense-of-teenage-knife-fighting/

[Commander Wallace]

:Kaleun_Applaud:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/04/in-defense-of-teenage-knife-fighting/


While there has been incidents of Police killing unarmed citizens, this clearly isn't the case here and the police did their jobs.


End of story.

[August]

The women, must be screened and preapproved.


:har:

[Moonlight]

The women, must be screened and preapproved.

Oooooh, this would make for a great cyberpunk film, all the pretty girlies will have to be felt up, makeup free and ravished at least once just to make sure they're not cheating the system, the ugly ones including all kids below the age of consent should be automatically thrown back into the cesspit they've come from. I'd buy that for a dollar!. :O:

I'm going as Nuts as you yanks. :haha:

[Torvald Von Mansee]

The US saw significant crime rise across major cities in 2020. And it's not letting up (https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/03/us/us-crime-rate-rise-2020/index.html)

My thoughts to the police: step back and allow society to work it out. Don't get caught in a situation where doing your job and enforcing the law will get you incarcerated.

Maybe don't murder people?

[Onkel Neal]

Definitely. I don't see anyone here supporting a police officer who goes too far and murders a criminals.

However, when a criminal resists a lawful arrest or fights back or acts a fool, you are putting the police officer in a bad situation.

If the perps resist or try to run, let them go and wave bye-bye. Call the social workers and let them know they need to go find the person.

[kozel1]

Chauvin will most likely have a new trial. Turns out that one of the jurors lied under oath claiming he has no deep knowledge of the case, yet he is a BLM activist, attended a protest held for George Floyd.
The defendant has a right for a fair trial. Many of us suspected that this whole thing smells like a mistrial and here we go.

[Rockstar]

Yes, even though I think the prosecutors did an excellent job. There are several obvious circumstances that could be cause for mistrial. Whatever the outcome I sincerily hope our system works like it should.

[Moonlight]

Lets hope Chauvin chooses a different defence attorney because the last one he had was bleeding pathetic.
I knew before the trial that he would be found guilty of murder, it was never going to be a fair trial what with VP Harris and dementia riddled Biden getting involved, they set Chauvin up for a fall to appease the black community, how bleeding lower can the USA get. :o

[Aktungbby]

https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/the-ring-girl-at-the-3rd-annual-sugar-ray-leonard-big-fighters-big-picture-id145040256?s=2048x2048 Talk 'bout Chauvinistic here!:O:

[3catcircus]

Lets hope Chauvin chooses a different defence attorney because the last one he had was bleeding pathetic.
I knew before the trial that he would be found guilty of murder, it was never going to be a fair trial what with VP Harris and dementia riddled Biden getting involved, they set Chauvin up for a fall to appease the black community, how bleeding lower can the USA get. :o

Or, it might just be that his attorney knew he wouldn't received a fair trial and knew of this juror's perjury and decided to keep his powder dry... Not likely, but possible.

[Texas Red]

Yes, even though I think the prosecutors did an excellent job. There are several obvious circumstances that could be cause for mistrial. Whatever the outcome I sincerily hope our system works like it should.

I pray that our system works like it should, if politics has touched our justice system (Which was a BIG thing for the founding fathers, and it is important to democracy) in a high-profile case like this, I am pretty sure our country is screwed.

It is highly unlikely that he will receive a new trial though, since this happens a lot following a criminal conviction.

[Rockstar]

I pray that our system works like it should, if politics has touched our justice system (Which was a BIG thing for the founding fathers, and it is important to democracy) in a high-profile case like this, I am pretty sure our country is screwed.

It is highly unlikely that he will receive a new trial though, since this happens a lot following a criminal conviction.


IMHO the reason why we will probably see a mistrial called. Is because politicians and political activists had already touched this case. None of them would sit tight and allow the system to work. Instead they kept running their mouth, calling for violence, and alledgedly even willing to commit perjury. All of those degenerates were making it about something it wasnt or even shown in court as motive.

[Texas Red]

IMHO the reason why we will probably see a mistrial called. Is because politicians and political activists had already touched this case. None of them would sit tight and allow the system to work. Instead they kept running their mouth, calling for violence, and alledgedly even willing to commit perjury. All of those degenerates were making it about something it wasnt or even shown in court as motive.

I understand your point, but wouldn't you say that in the current state America is in now that basically anything that makes top headlines would have some politics involved? I would say it would be virtually impossible for either political party to not say anything about the case since it is SO important to the American people and thus can be used as a weapon against either political party.

I don't think that the Democrats would try and rig the election since they already have the majority of the black community behind their backs and Derek Chauvin was guilty (that was gonna be the outcome of the trial- with or without perjury or whatever claims Chauvin's lawyer has made), they would be smart enough to not try and do something bad so they can't get something they already have.

Overall, what's the point of rigging the jury when you already have the majority of the black community behind your back?

[u crank]

Overall, what's the point of rigging the jury when you already have the majority of the black community behind your back?

Deciding someone's guilt or innocence by race seems to be the very definition of rigging the jury.

[Commander Wallace]

Deciding someone's guilt or innocence by race seems to be the very definition of rigging the jury.


Exactly :agree:

[Rockstar]

I understand your point, but wouldn't you say that in the current state America is in now that basically anything that makes top headlines would have some politics involved? I would say it would be virtually impossible for either political party to not say anything about the case since it is SO important to the American people and thus can be used as a weapon against either political party.

I don't think that the Democrats would try and rig the election since they already have the majority of the black community behind their backs and Derek Chauvin was guilty (that was gonna be the outcome of the trial- with or without perjury or whatever claims Chauvin's lawyer has made), they would be smart enough to not try and do something bad so they can't get something they already have.

Overall, what's the point of rigging the jury when you already have the majority of the black community behind your back?


A responsible free press and the free flow of information is a useful asset. Headlines sell papers and people gotta make a living you know.



Its irresponsible press, politicians, and the race baiters however rushed in and made this and continued to make this about race. When infact Chauvin was never charged or convicted of a hate crime nor was race ever brought up in court as motivation for his action and behavior.


In this country the accused has a right to impartial jury. But because of this manufactured state of America by an irresponsible press, several politicians including the current president and the mobs outside the courthouse. A jurist accused of purgery. Chauvin may not have had that benefit.

[3catcircus]

I understand your point, but wouldn't you say that in the current state America is in now that basically anything that makes top headlines would have some politics involved? I would say it would be virtually impossible for either political party to not say anything about the case since it is SO important to the American people and thus can be used as a weapon against either political party.

I don't think that the Democrats would try and rig the election since they already have the majority of the black community behind their backs and Derek Chauvin was guilty (that was gonna be the outcome of the trial- with or without perjury or whatever claims Chauvin's lawyer has made), they would be smart enough to not try and do something bad so they can't get something they already have.

Overall, what's the point of rigging the jury when you already have the majority of the black community behind your back?

Except they *don't* have the majority of the black community behind them. Go into those cities where antifa and BLM rioters destroyed businesses and ask the black owners of those businesses if they support antifa and BLM.

Go into those cities where black, white, asian (or really any ethnic background) people live in fear of other black people and ask if they want more or less police presence.

This was a show trial in a kangaroo court with a predetermined outcome. The jury was not sequestered. At least one juror perjured himself. The trial venue was not changed. Media was allowed to engage in circus side show antics. Politicians interjected themselves in *the process*. The city paid off the family even before the trial occurred.

This isn't jury nullification where jurors purposely find a defendant not guilty because they don't believe that the law is fair. This was jury tampering/jury fixing to ensure a guilty verdict for crimes that Chauvin didn't actually meet the legal definition of having committed.

[mapuc]

22 ½ years prison.

Was this a fair sentence ? What do you think.

I think it was ok, Reason Whatever a criminal has done, they should be treated with some kind of respect(not the word I would use, but could not remember it)

Markus

[3catcircus]

22 ½ years prison.

Was this a fair sentence ? What do you think.

I think it was ok, Reason Whatever a criminal has done, they should be treated with some kind of respect(not the word I would use, but could not remember it)

Markus

There needs to be a retrial - there was clear jury tampering when one of the jurors admitted he was a BLM activist and perjured himself.

[Platapus]

The concept of "fair sentence" is subjective.



Some may think it is too long and some may think it is too short.

[Jimbuna]

The family will undoubtedly say too short because they felt thirty years was more appropriate.

[3catcircus]

The family will undoubtedly say too short because they felt thirty years was more appropriate.

The "family" hadn't talked to their criminal relative in over 10 years before this.

The millions in settlement money paid by the city is guaranteed already wasted - his daughter will *never* see a dime.

Fact of the matter is that the cops did society a favor - guaranteed that Floyd was going to continue committing more crimes and it was just plain dumb luck that the pregnant woman he pointed a gun at during his previous crimes didn't get shot by him.

[August]

The "family" hadn't talked to their criminal relative in over 10 years before this.

The millions in settlement money paid by the city is guaranteed already wasted - his daughter will *never* see a dime.

Fact of the matter is that the cops did society a favor - guaranteed that Floyd was going to continue committing more crimes and it was just plain dumb luck that the pregnant woman he pointed a gun at during his previous crimes didn't get shot by him.


Exactly. The government is building statues to this animal and it reminds me of how the nazis took a thug like Horst Wessel and turned his death into a national spectacle. Our government is doing the same exact thing with George Floyd.

[Jimbuna]

The "family" hadn't talked to their criminal relative in over 10 years before this.

The millions in settlement money paid by the city is guaranteed already wasted - his daughter will *never* see a dime.

Fact of the matter is that the cops did society a favor - guaranteed that Floyd was going to continue committing more crimes and it was just plain dumb luck that the pregnant woman he pointed a gun at during his previous crimes didn't get shot by him.

Some might say the above is a little harsh but either way, your entitled to your opinion.

[August]

Some might say the above is a little harsh but either way, your entitled to your opinion.


Maybe it's harsh but it's the truth.

[Dowly]

The "family" hadn't talked to their criminal relative in over 10 years before this.

The millions in settlement money paid by the city is guaranteed already wasted - his daughter will *never* see a dime.

Fact of the matter is that the cops did society a favor - guaranteed that Floyd was going to continue committing more crimes and it was just plain dumb luck that the pregnant woman he pointed a gun at during his previous crimes didn't get shot by him.

Exactly. The government is building statues to this animal and it reminds me of how the nazis took a thug like Horst Wessel and turned his death into a national spectacle. Our government is doing the same exact thing with George Floyd.


Come ooon, you two -------- are so close! No need to beat around the bush, just say it!

[Onkel Neal]

22 ½ years prison.

Was this a fair sentence ? What do you think.

I think it was ok, Reason Whatever a criminal has done, they should be treated with some kind of respect(not the word I would use, but could not remember it)

Markus

I don't believe criminals are due any measure of respect but when a law enforcement officer has a suspect subdued and in restraints, they should not continue to use unnecessary force. Chauvin should have used some sense, the guy screwed up. He has to pay the price.

[mapuc]

The word I could not remember yesterday was decency-which a police should show a criminal during their arrest.

Read something interesting on a friends wall a few minutes ago.

He will be pardoned by Biden in about a year from now.

Made we wonder if Biden pardoned Chauvin-what about riots and other destructive demonstrations.

I don't think Chauvin will be pardoned, not for the next 4-5 year or so.

Markus

[Platapus]

Read something interesting on a friends wall a few minutes ago.

He will be pardoned by Biden in about a year from now.

Markus




You might want to get smarter friends. He was convicted of a state crime.

[3catcircus]

Come ooon, you two -------- are so close! No need to beat around the bush, just say it!

Say what? That George Floyd was just a bad person? That he shouldn't have purposely and knowingly been passing counterfeit money to get real money back in change to be able to pay his drug dealer? Or that when confronted by police he swallowed the drugs to hide them, causing a massive overdose that stopped his heart and respiratory abilities causing his own death?

Or that Marxist thugs have been burning looting and rioting using him as an excuse to do so? How many of the black people who own businesses that BLM and antifa destroyed do you think support them? Unfortunately, Minneapolis didn't have their own Rooftop Koreans but they had an ample number of leftists running government... Likewise Seattle and Portland and every other sh!thole run by Democrats...

[Sean C]

I've been told that Coronavirus is so deadly and dangerous that the entire world had to change the way we live and interact.


I've also been told that, although George Floyd had Covid-19 when he died, it played no role in his death.


:hmmm:

[August]

The word I could not remember yesterday was decency-which a police should show a criminal during their arrest.

Read something interesting on a friends wall a few minutes ago.

He will be pardoned by Biden in about a year from now.

Made we wonder if Biden pardoned Chauvin-what about riots and other destructive demonstrations.

I don't think Chauvin will be pardoned, not for the next 4-5 year or so.

Markus


I think if he is still in jail in 5 years he'll do the entire double dime or he will leave feet first.

[mapuc]

I think if he is still in jail in 5 years he'll do the entire double dime or he will leave feet first.

Platapus wrote:
"You might want to get smarter friends. He was convicted of a state crime"
So I made a search and found this wiki page

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_pardons_in_the_United_States

Where I read following

"A pardon is an executive order granting clemency for a conviction. It may be granted "at any time" after the commission of the crime.
As per Justice Department regulations, convicted persons may only apply five or more years after their sentence has been completed.

However, the President's power to pardon is not restricted by any temporal constraints except that the crime must have been committed.

A pardon is an expression of the President's forgiveness and ordinarily is granted in recognition of the applicant's acceptance of responsibility for the crime and established good conduct for a significant period of time after conviction or completion of sentence. It does not signify innocence.

Its practical effect is the restoration of civil rights and statutory disabilities (e.g., firearm rights, occupational licensing) associated with a past criminal conviction.

In rarer cases, such as the pardon of Richard Nixon, a pardon can also halt criminal proceedings and prevent an indictment, though this has not been tested in court.

A reprieve is a temporary postponement of a punishment (refer to pardon/related concepts).
A commutation is the mitigation of the sentence of someone currently serving a sentence for a crime pursuant to a conviction, without cancelling the conviction itself"

And Platapus is correct

Limitation:
"Federal pardons issued by the president apply only to federal law; they do not apply to civil, state, or local offenses. Federal pardons also do not apply to cases of impeachment. Pardons for state crimes are handled by governors or a state pardon board.

One limitation to the president's power to grant pardons is "in cases of impeachment." This means that the president cannot use a pardon to stop an officeholder from being impeached, or to undo the effects of an impeachment and conviction."

Markus

[August]

As you noted, the President cannot pardon state crimes Markus. Chauvin was convicted by the state of Minnesota for manslaughter, not the federal government. Now he also faces charges by the Feds in connection. If he is found guilty then it is theoretically possible for a future president to pardon those convictions.

The only way he gets out of his 22 year sentence is to get a court to overturn the state conviction. That is probably more possible than a presidential pardon.

[Onkel Neal]

Looks like the Kyle trial is coming to an end

https://news.yahoo.com/explainer-why-did-judge-drop-195605080.html

On its face, convicting Rittenhouse on that count looked like a legal slam dunk. No one contested that he was 17 the night of the protest in August 2020. Bystander and surveillance video clearly shows him walking around with the rifle strapped to his chest before the shootings, using the gun to shoot and kill Joseph Rosenbaum and Anthony Huber and wound Gaige Grosskreutz.

But Rittenhouse's attorneys seized on a subsection of the Wisconsin law that states the ban on minors possessing dangerous weapons applies to minors armed with rifles or shotguns only if those weapons are short-barreled. The language stems from a bill that then-Republican Gov. Tommy Thompson signed in 1991. Lawmakers across the country were trying to find ways to curb gang violence around that time. Kenosha defense attorney Michael Cicchini said the law was likely intended to prevent youths from carrying sawed-off shotguns.

Rittenhouse's AR-15-style rifle was not short-barreled.

Personally, I'm hoping for a not guilty verdict.

[August]

I don't see what they can convict him of but I do understand they plan to tell the jury they can find him guilty of some so far unspecified "lesser charges".

I also think the feds might go after the kid too.

[Aktungbby]

I've been following this matter with great interest, having on a few occasions found myself in similar situations working Federal security and Airbase police work, where bystanders, seeing my predicament, ran to detain the berserk person(s) threatening me and saved me potential paperwork & lawsuits etc. Other than being young, dumb, and in the wrong place at the wrong time, the 17 year old Rittenhouse had an inalienable right to defend himself in all 3 shootings. 1:The obviously deranged gun grabber died with muzzle soot on his hands. One simply never gives up a firearm; unless ordered by a peace officer! 2: The actual hit with the skateboard to the head /neck is a lethal attack at the level of deterrence by deadly force. A similar head-strike is prohibited in trained baton use; and 3: the wounded EMT, brandishing his own firearm, was a professional who should have known better...the more so as 16 other gun shots (ie: discharge of weapon within city limits??!!)emanating from his faction on videos only reflected the chaos "in the moment". Basically the Kenosha affair was two not-so-well ordered militias, tacitly condoned by overworked police, becoming a vigilante mob; singling out an over armed dolt police cadet?? for self-defense would be a travesty of equal justice for all. Moreover the facts coming out during the trial that the prosecution should have known beforehand, point up the poorness of the state's case in this knee-jerk showtrial.

[Sean C]

I think the kid had every right to defend himself. But I also think he is 100% responsible for putting himself in that situation. He could have stayed at home, but he chose not to. I wouldn't be totally opposed to finding him guilty of a lesser crime such as illegally carrying a firearm.

[Aktungbby]

I wouldn't be totally opposed to finding him guilty of a lesser crime such as illegally carrying a firearm. Precisely! and, as in olden daze, the judge could suspend all charges in lieu of his joining the military, preferably the Army or the Marines....God knows he can certainly shoot straight! and knows when to start buggin' out too!:arrgh!:

[August]

Except that the judge has already ruled that he wasn't illegally possessing the firearm.

[Aktungbby]

I know; but the kid needs to go where they keep an eye on him till he reaches 30. Where were the parents; not monitoring their 17 yr. old offspring trotting off to riots, mayhem and civil unrest with an AR-15!!?? The kid may O.J. the criminal beef but there's still the civil suits coming up; marionetted by circumcised $hyster$ as bad as the prosecutor...and mommy and daddy are liable. I recommended the USAF Academy to my rambunctious erstwhile nephew some 40 years ago...he just made Brigadier General; likewise I kept pressing my youngest brother into the Navy when he wouldn't stay in school; he did 20 years incl. reserves and left as a petty officer after helmsmanning the USS Little Rock and San Bernadino...and has a retirement! I may thus be considered to have smattering of whereof I speak on child development...plus in police cadet Rittenhouse's case, I think his PD career aspirations are over with!?? :haha:

[3catcircus]

And the jury recessed. Poso reported that a US Marshal has confirmed that it is 10 not guiltys with 2 holding out only because they are fearful of mob retaliation and doxxing by the media. The judge should just declare mistrial with prejudice due to jury tampering as a result.

[August]

I know; but the kid needs to go where they keep an eye on him till he reaches 30. Where were the parents; not monitoring their 17 yr. old offspring trotting off to riots, mayhem and civil unrest with an AR-15!!?? The kid may O.J. the criminal beef but there's still the civil suits coming up; marionetted by circumcised $hyster$ as bad as the prosecutor...and mommy and daddy are liable. I recommended the USAF Academy to my rambunctious erstwhile nephew some 40 years ago...he just made Brigadier General; likewise I kept pressing my youngest brother into the Navy when he wouldn't stay in school; he did 20 years incl. reserves and left as a petty officer after helmsmanning the USS Little Rock and San Bernadino...and has a retirement! I may thus be considered to have smattering of whereof I speak on child development...plus in police cadet Rittenhouse's case, I think his PD career aspirations are over with!?? :haha:




The kid needs to be set free as this is a clear case of self defense. As for his right to be there, he had every right as long as this is still a free country.

[August]

And the jury recessed. Poso reported that a US Marshal has confirmed that it is 10 not guiltys with 2 holding out only because they are fearful of mob retaliation and doxxing by the media. The judge should just declare mistrial with prejudice due to jury tampering as a result.


Just what the prosecution wants. If those numbers are true and i have a hard time believing that a US Marshal would throw away his career like that, then hopefully the holdouts will be convinced to do the right thing by the others in the morning.



Meanwhile I just can't understand why the jury is not sequestered.

[Catfish]

So any self-declared private militia can grab their guns, travel to whatever they see fit and have a good time "defending" american values or what they think that is? While they just want some action, but not at home of course. What is the police and any official law enforcement for?

To do private intentional riot tourism with a loaded half-automatic gun seems like a case of intentionally looking for action and trouble.
Walking around privately pointing any gun (no one cares what this gun is or was especially, the case is not about bearing guns and which, but about killing) at people, while no one can know what this person walking around "proud, like a hero out of a western", not belonging to official police force, is doing or about to do.

What about some black 17-year-olds with guns, patrolling the streets in other cities than their own due to their right of free movement, to quench riots, how do (white) people look at that?

Pleading not guilty, not even a hint of self-doubt "I did nothing wrong, i was defending myself"?
If this "poor, harmless kid" gets out free i am sure we will hear of him again, probably after his next provocation.

[Onkel Neal]

So any self-declared private militia can grab their guns, travel to whatever they see fit and have a good time "defending" american values or what they think that is? While they just want some action, but not at home of course. What is the police and any official law enforcement for?


If the police cannot protect you, shouldn't you be allowed to protect yourself? I feel stupid just asking that. :haha:

To do private intentional riot tourism with a loaded half-automatic gun seems like a case of intentionally looking for action and trouble.
Walking around privately pointing any gun at people, while no one can know what this person walking around "proud, like a hero out of a western", not belonging to official police force, is doing or about to do.


I think you are not the only person who objects to people who won't cower down before criminals and mobs by labeling them "cowboys". That seems to be cultural thing with many in Europe. I wonder how many secretly admire the cowboy but for some reasons cannot admit to it.


What about some black 17-year-olds with guns, patrolling the streets in other cities than their own due to their right of free movement, to quench riots, how do (white) people look at that?



If a mob was attacking a black owned business and the blacks were defending it, pretty sure most people would back that up.

My only criticism of this kid is he's too young to be involved in this kind of situation. Where were his parents? I'm all for defending property against the mob but he should have been studying algebra at home. There aren't enough 30-60 year olds in Wisconsin to handle this?

As for the rioters and mobs, I have no objection to seeing them gunned down.

[Catfish]

Good points, still
If the police cannot protect you, shouldn't you be allowed to protect yourself? I feel stupid just asking that. :haha:
Well of course, when i am threatened myself, or people close to me are. But if some people in far away New York riot and set fire to cars and loot, will you jump in your car with a gun, to patrol the streets there and "help" the police?
It is not about cowering down or criticising cowboys, but as i read in several reports Rittenhouse walked away from the shooting "..proud, like a hero out of a western", and i think this is not appropriate to the situation but rather childish. Well he still is a child, yes, and where were his parents.

B.t.w. I did my own playing and behaving like a "cowboy" when i was a child, no real shooting involved. Mostly ahem, at least not against people.

As for the rioters and mobs, I have no objection to seeing them gunned down.No sympathy for them, but gun them down?

[Onkel Neal]

Yeah, I see what you mean. As I said, a 17-year old has no business in that situation. For him, he may have been actually playing cowboy in his head.

[mapuc]

An American has the right to defend them self. Are the rules when it comes to this self defend the same as in many other countries like Denmark and Sweden.

Here it says you are allowed to use so much force needed to pacify a person and not more.

Markus

[3catcircus]

Just what the prosecution wants. If those numbers are true and i have a hard time believing that a US Marshal would throw away his career like that, then hopefully the holdouts will be convinced to do the right thing by the others in the morning.



Meanwhile I just can't understand why the jury is not sequestered.

Apparently the defense has filed a moron to dismiss (mistrial with prejudice) because the State knowingly and purposely gave them a different version of the video evidence, which is prejudicial to the defendant's rights. That gave them a smaller filesize video with lower resolution than what they played at trial and then when confronted by the defense, have them the a larger file size video with higher resolution - 2 days after the evidence was closed. The judge needs to throw the case out and have Lunch Box and Littlebinger frog-marched to a cell.

[Onkel Neal]

Apparently the defense has filed a moron to dismiss (mistrial with prejudice) ...

That's a new judicial action, is it?

[August]

So any self-declared private militia can grab their guns, travel to whatever they see fit and have a good time "defending" american values or what they think that is? While they just want some action, but not at home of course. What is the police and any official law enforcement for?

Way over simplified but yeah. Free country and all that.

To do private intentional riot tourism with a loaded half-automatic gun seems like a case of intentionally looking for action and trouble. What self defense weapon would you pick instead? Personally I see the AR as a fine choice for several reasons.

What about some black 17-year-olds with guns, patrolling the streets in other cities than their own due to their right of free movement, to quench riots, how do (white) people look at that? We had whole companies of them marching around last summer. This Person of a Lighter Shade for one is fine with it.

Pleading not guilty, not even a hint of self-doubt "I did nothing wrong, i was defending myself"?
If this "poor, harmless kid" gets out free i am sure we will hear of him again, probably after his next provocation.Yeah yeah wishing ain't gonna make it so. The facts are that he was defending himself from people trying to kill him and in my country that is not wrong.

[3catcircus]

That's a new judicial action, is it?

Well, my fat fingers aside, Lunchbox and Littlebinger *are* morons. The judge is now hearing how they purposely sent a different video to the defense than the one shown in court - the one piece of evidence that the whole prosecution is relying on. With indications of a "day of reckoning" for the State. The problem is the defense are decent people who just asked for a mistrial WITHOUT prejudice, rather than with prejudice. They need to recognize that the prosecutors aren't incompetent - they're evil and spiteful.

[Sean C]

An American has the right to defend them self. Are the rules when it comes to this self defend the same as in many other countries like Denmark and Sweden.

Here it says you are allowed to use so much force needed to pacify a person and not more.

Markus

It varies from state to state. Some states have what is known as "castle doctrine" (a man's home is his castle and he has every right to defend it). However, in some cases the property owner is required to retreat to a place of safety and only use deadly force when no other option is available.

Some states have a "stand your ground" law. This essentially means that deadly force can be used without retreating - as long as there is a reasonable fear for one's life or the life of other innocent people.

Still other states have neither of these laws and a person could get into a lot of trouble for using deadly force for any reason.

In any case it is usually a requirement that there was no other option and that the person had good reason to believe that their life was in imminent danger.

[3catcircus]

It varies from state to state. Some states have what is known as "castle doctrine" (a man's home is his castle and he has every right to defend it). However, in some cases the property owner is required to retreat to a place of safety and only use deadly force when no other option is available.

Some states have a "stand your ground" law. This essentially means that deadly force can be used without retreating - as long as there is a reasonable fear for one's life or the life of other innocent people.

Still other states have neither of these laws and a person could get into a lot of trouble for using deadly force for any reason.

In any case it is usually a requirement that there was no other option and that the person had good reason to believe that their life was in imminent danger.

I think the video and testimony more than established that he met the threshold for use of deadly force in a self-defense situation. For Lunchbox to even state that he should have let them beat him before he fired would have dragged the deal for me as a juror. They want people to think that they aren't allowed to resist an angry leftist mob.

[August]

I think the video and testimony more than established that he met the threshold for use of deadly force in a self-defense situation. For Lunchbox to even state that he should have let them beat him before he fired would have dragged the deal for me as a juror. They want people to think that they aren't allowed to resist an angry leftist mob.


Well it seems pretty clear cut to me too but if it's that way to the jury then why are they now going into day 3 of deliberations?

[Aktungbby]

Well it seems pretty clear cut to me too but if it's that way to the jury then why are they now going into day 3 of deliberations?Simple! meals are on the county!:O:

[Aktungbby]

...but the kid needs to go where they keep an eye on him until he turns 30. Where were the parents; not monitoring their 17 yr. old offspring trotting off to riots, mayhem and civil unrest with an AR-15!!?? The kid may O.J. the criminal beef but there's still the civil suits coming up; marionetted by circumcised $hyster$ as bad as the prosecutor...and mommy and daddy are liable.

My only criticism of this kid is he's too young to be involved in this kind of situation. Where were his parents? I'm all for defending property against the mob but he should have been studying algebra at home. There aren't enough 30-60 year olds in Wisconsin to handle this?
:sign_yeah::agree::()1:

[August]

Simple! meals are on the county!:O:

You know at first I thought this might be deliberate. Everyone was so ready for a fight that first night of deliberations and maybe they were trying to defuse the situation by not giving them the spark but it's getting close to the weekend and if that was their strategy it's not going to work out if they don't come back with a verdict by this morning.

[Catfish]

so it is about politics and strategy..
Does the judge have to accept what the jury says, does he have a veto right?

[August]

so it is about politics and strategy..
Does the judge have to accept what the jury says, does he have a veto right?

It probably varies from state to state. I have heard of such a thing though. I doubt that would happen here.

[Aktungbby]

so it is about politics and strategy..
Does the judge have to accept what the jury says, does he have a veto right?It's rare but a judge can refute the verdict: IE: jury nullification or more properly: judgement non objecto verdicto: JNOV; but the reasoning must be clear cut, nonpolitical, and utterly lawful.:hmmm: This trial is a complete showcase farce. My ex D.A. wife says both attournys got 'mail order law degrees' and should be disbarred. My college buddy/best man & former LA criminal prosecutor, says the whole matter never should have gone to court. The motion for a mistrial over the undersized video (the copter FBI infra-red video)is ridiculous. So the defense had to squint a little harder! As I said before, a showcase knee-jerk trial. Good thing the National Guard is in position so two "less-than-well-ordered militias" don't do it again...

[3catcircus]

so it is about politics and strategy..
Does the judge have to accept what the jury says, does he have a veto right?

Judges can and do issue JNOVs where they can set aside the jury's verdict. The *big* thing is that, unlike some states, in Wisconsin, the jury is *not* involved in sentencing. They could find him guilty and the judge could set it aside out let it stand but sentence him to time served. Under the circumstances, there is no mandatory minimum sentence.

[mapuc]

Have any of you been thinking about this young lads mental health ?

How did he feel, when he had to fire these shots, was he scared, angry or what.

Markus

[em2nought]

He did a surprisingly good job of taking out immediate dirtbag threats and still surviving while completely surrounded. I'd guess he was scared, but he kept his wits about him surprisingly well. :hmmm:

[August]

He did a surprisingly good job of taking out immediate dirtbag threats and still surviving while completely surrounded. I'd guess he was scared, but he kept his wits about him surprisingly well. :hmmm:

I agree. Its obviously affecting him though as his breakdown on the stand indicates.

[Sean C]

One would have to be a complete psychopath to not be affected at all by killing another person. I've seen multiple police officers immediately melt down into a full blown panic attack after justifiably using deadly force. Kyle's actions immediately following the shooting do seem to indicate that he was at least a little shaken up. But he did do a good job of not losing it completely. He went straight to the police, apparently to try to surrender and get away from the whole situation.


I think at that moment he realized that this isn't a game.

[August]

The Jury has quit for the day. Tomorrow will start day 4 of deliberations.

[mapuc]

The Jury has quit for the day. Tomorrow will start day 4 of deliberations.

Does this mean they can't agree on whether he's guilty or not ?

Markus

[August]

Does this mean they can't agree on whether he's guilty or not ?

Markus


Possibly but in similar cases the jury usually sends a message to that effect by now. So far there has not been any such notes.

[Onkel Neal]

As usual, I have not been following this case very deeply but I ask: if the people who were shot had never approached the defendant or threatened him with violence, do you think they still would have been shot?

[August]

As usual, I have not been following this case very deeply but I ask: if the people who were shot had never approached the defendant or threatened him with violence, do you think they still would have been shot?

No, because Rittenhouse didn't shoot at anyone that was not actively attacking him although he had plenty of opportunity. If they weren't there we would never have heard of this kid name.

[Aktungbby]

No, because Rittenhouse didn't shoot at anyone that was not actively attacking him although he had plenty of opportunity. If they weren't there we would never have heard of this kid name.Moreover and most critically, he was visibly retreating and therefore the non aggressor from attacker #1 then fell and was struck with potentially deadly force by attacker #2 with a skateboard to the head/neck; with a follow-on assault by the professional #3! the EMT, illegally brandishing a firearm even as several shots were fired by others-all on video- behind him. That guy, a professional, had travelled to Kenosha, armed on an expired CCW(inexcuseable in a professional!) just as Rittenhaus had. He should at least be charged with brandishing a weapon, and as many of his disordered militia as can be ID'd charged with "discharge of a firearm within city limits." Mr prosecutor would be kept busy...with cases he can win??! I believe this case is headed for a hung jury...and a possible retrial or outright dismissal.

[Jimbuna]

A US teenager who shot dead two men during racial justice protests has been cleared of homicide and all other counts after claiming self-defence.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-59352228

[August]

I hope this will show for our European friends. This is the video of the verdict being read. Go to the 5.50 mark to see Kyles reaction.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tvb6gVpw2cM

[Catfish]

I hope this will show for our European friends. [...]
"That will show 'em"? Noted. No surprise here by the way.

[mapuc]

Not guilty on any account.

There's one thing he has to live with for the rest of his life-taken another persons life.

Markus

[3catcircus]

"That will show 'em"? Noted. No surprise here by the way.

Lost in translation. He's hoping that the video will be able to be seen rather than being censored.

[u crank]

"That will show 'em"? Noted. No surprise here by the way.

He said 'show for' as in 'play for', not show 'em'.

[August]

"That will show 'em"? Noted. No surprise here by the way.




Obviously I meant I hoped that the You tube video will show. Isn't there a problem with certain You Tube videos not displaying overseas? But if you want to feel aggrieved then its no skin off my nose. I'm just glad to see justice served.

[Catfish]

Seems i misunderstood, video showing perfectly. It just sounded like a revenge or something – sry, my fault.
edit: Thanks for posting.

[mapuc]

I'm just glad to see justice served.

Could the verdict been otherwise than not guilty, what do you say.

Furthermore can the prosecutor appeal the verdict to a higher court ?

Markus

[3catcircus]

Obviously I meant I hoped that the You tube video will show. Isn't there a problem with certain You Tube videos not displaying overseas? But if you want to feel aggrieved then its no skin off my nose. I'm just glad to see justice served.

Now let's hope that two things happen:

1. Kyle sues every last scumbag in the media, as well as Biden and various other pols and celebrities who tried and convicted him in the court of public opinion and that he wins every trial.

2. Rioters try to FAFO tonight and the national guard kills every last one of them.

[mapuc]

FAFO ?

Markus

[3catcircus]

Could the verdict been otherwise than not guilty, what do you say.

Furthermore can the prosecutor appeal the verdict to a higher court ?

Markus

The only way it could have been guilty is if the jury failed in their duty. This case, when you look at the actual evidence and testimony rather than social media posts or new reports, is cut and dried completely self defense.

The prosecution can not appeal not guilty verdicts - you can't be tried twice for the same crimes that you've been accused of. The prosecutors have bigger worries about whether or not they'll be disbarred or see inside a jail cell. The two things you NEVER do as a prosecutor (claim the defendant is guilty for exercising his 5th amendment or his Miranda rights and withholding exculpatory evidence) - these prosecutors did - willfully and with malice.

[3catcircus]

FAFO ?

Markus

F$&@ Around and Find Out. An exhortation daring criminal rioters to attempt criminal acts against people who are armed and dangerous.

[mapuc]

Three only way it could have been guilty is if the jury failed in their duty. This case, when you look at the actual evidence and testimony rather than social media posts or new reports, is cut and dried completely self defense.

The prosecution can not appeal not guilty verdicts - you can't be tried twice for the same crimes that you've been accused of. Three prosecutors have bigger worries about whether or not they'll be disbarred or see inside a jail cell. The two things you NEVER do as a prosecutor (claim the defendant is guilty for exercising his 5th amendment or his Miranda rights and withholding exculpatory evidence) - these prosecutors did - willfully and with malice.

Thank you for the answer. It clearly show me that my knowledge about American law is insufficient.

Here a prosecutor can appeal a verdict. Which happens often.

Markus

[Buddahaid]

Now let's hope that two things happen:

1. Kyle sues every last scumbag in the media, as well as Biden and various other pols and celebrities who tried and convicted him in the court of public opinion and that he wins every trial.

2. Rioters try to FAFO tonight and the national guard kills every last one of them.

Polishing your jackboots?

[3catcircus]

Polishing your jackboots?

Nope - the antifa scum are wearing all of them, with the Austrian government not far behind.

[3catcircus]

Thank you for the answer. It clearly show me that my knowledge about American law is insufficient.

Here a prosecutor can appeal a verdict. Which happens often.

Markus

That can generally only be covered by a mistrial without prejudice - there was legal procedure that wasn't adhered to, she to an unintentional error that offers no legal remedy in the trial, so they have a "do over." The defense can appeal a guilty verdict. The persecution normally can't appeal a note guilty verdict due to not being allowed to try someone for the same crime twice.

[mapuc]

That can generally only be covered by a mistrial without prejudice - there was legal procedure that wasn't adhered to, she to an unintentional error that offers no legal remedy in the trial, so they have a "do over." The defense can appeal a guilty verdict. The persecution normally can't appeal a note guilty verdict due to not being allowed to try someone for the same crime twice.

Your answer made me remember a movie with Tommy Lee Jones Can't come up with the title something with Jeopardy from the 90's I think it was.

Story:
A woman have just been released from a many years sentence for having killed her husband. It later turns out he's still alive-Well this time she kills him, but since she already been in jail for this murder, she goes free.

Edit
Just been reading a Danish article about the verdict.
I don't know how to translate an article so I just post the Danish version and i hope you know how to translate it into English

https://ekstrabladet.dk/nyheder/viceguvernoer-om-rittenhouse-frifindelse-netop-det-vi-frygtede/8999327

End edit

Markus

[August]

The machine is still going after him:


https://media.patriots.win/post/IxkGlOZ9.jpeg

[3catcircus]

The machine is still going after him:


https://media.patriots.win/post/IxkGlOZ9.jpeg

Chinese propaganda bots hard at work, I see.