Video emerges of Minneapolis police killing a citizen - - Riots

[August]

Originally Posted by 3catcircus

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]

Originally Posted by August

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]

Originally Posted by August

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]

Originally Posted by 3catcircus

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]

Originally Posted by Buddahaid

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

[3catcircus]

Originally Posted by Catfish

Worth posting i think

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...

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]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

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]

Originally Posted by Catfish

Worth posting i think

Thanks, that was helpful.

[3catcircus]

Originally Posted by Onkel Neal

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/...yd/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-c...ry?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...ourt-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/wes...rs-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

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.