Chauvin is guilty of reckless endangerment though and he's white and Floyd was black. Then it's all caught on video for eternity.
Thus mitigating Floyd's past and medical issues.
Cop who killed George Floyd stabbed in prison
- Thread starter stinkynuts
- Start date
Thus mitigating Floyd's past and medical issues.
Because police know about positional asphyxiation, know what to do and what not to? See above link.
Hate to break it to you, but someone who can keep saying "I can't breath" loud enough to be heard 15 feet away, can in fact, breath. Dude died of an overdose, all else in political theater paid for by Xi.
So tell us all, how little, how very little you know about it. Tell us all how little you know about human anatomy and bodily functions.. Question for you. If a person is struggling to breathe, even say from smoke inhalation. You’re saying they can’t cry for help? Yes you just did. Look at you go.
Also, when I was in my teens we did wall tokes. Suck in lungfuls of smoke. Back against a wall while friends pushed on our chest until we passed out. Mega hint..You must have lived a pretty boring youth..…
And while at it, tell us all why police get training on it, what not to do, what to do as soon as the cuffs are on. Which is to roll them on their side…( called a recovery position) and from there help them sit or stand…Why they get suspended and or fired when they don’t. Why their employers get sued for big bucks when they don’t, and in an exceptional case of abuse. Why they go to jail
Last edited:
Wow, yes, we should totally take as gospel the opinion of an
It is my understanding that the use of choke holds and other neck restraints have been banned in most police forces. The reason? Too many deaths or injuries to people being arrested. It is banned in Canada, LA, NYC and many places across the US (apparently they are banned in 24 states). I cannot speak about its use in other places. As for the question if Floyd should have been arrested, of course! Nobody has issue with him being arrested, they have issues with him dying during the arrest. The whole "Chauvin was made an example" argument is weak sauce. He used a restraint for a VERY long time (9 fucking minutes) where Floyd was not fighting back or anything. Was he power tripping? Maybe. Was he trying to send a message? Maybe. Did he mean to kill Floyd? No, I doubt it. But the end result was he choked the life out him slowly but surely. And none of the cops that were with him did anything to intervene. That is why this was a real problem here.
I think some people don't understand what the Black Lives Matter movement is about. It isn't that they are better than anyone, it's a reminder to police that they are people and they matter as well. While we know police have shot and killed unarmed white people, they have a horrible track record when it comes to POC. Time and time again, we see video or hear stories about how they shot and killed people who might have been running away (like Michael Brown in Ferguson, MS), or from the use of illegal chokeholds (like Eric Garner in NY). And don't get me started on the cop who shot and killed a 12 year old with a toy gun virtually immediately after he got out of his car (Tamir Rice in Cleveland). He was basically executed. The cop shot first before even telling the kid to put the gun down. Tell me that would've happened with a white kid...
So you are not arguing that neck restraints were contrary to the police use of force policy that Chauvin had been trained in at the time. The evidence at trial included that officers received training in the application of neck restraints. I have to assume that this was not the first time that Chauvin or other officers in his police force used this restraint. This was, however, the first time anyone died in connection with its use. As stated by me in any earlier post, ANY restraint CAN be deadly, depending on the medical condition of the suspect. Whether Chauvin is as "evil" as some try to paint him to be depends on whether he had any reasonable belief that what he was doing would lead to serious injury or death. In the end, he's certainly responsible for his error of judgement. He should have checked on Floyd when his pleading became persistent. Whether murder was the right charge is debatable to me. I believe his murder conviction appeal is still pending. The fact that no other officers intervened just tells me that NONE of the cops at the scene believed that Floyd was about to die. I don't believe that any of these cops were seeking Floyd's death. I think this was a case of bad judgement, possibly tainted by irritation at Floyd's poor behaviour, not a case of cops deciding to publicly execute a relatively low level criminal.
There are no stats that prove that in the US a higher percentage of black crime suspects who resist, threaten the police or others, or flee are killed than white crime suspects who resist, threaten the police or others, or flee. All the stats prove is that black Americans have more encounters per capita with police, are charged more often per capita, and are jailed more often per capita. All that means is that there is a problem with crime in black communities (mostly black on black crime). There will be no solution until the real problem is recognized, and that problem is NOT that the police are looking to shoot black suspects.
Time and time again there are sensational stories. And time and time again they prove to be something else entirely.
Don't get me wrong, there's plenty of bad policing. We ask some pretty dumb people to make some pretty difficult decisions. However, EVERYONE encounters this, not just black people.
Of course, the best way not to be shot and killed by police continues to be to ensure that you don't commit any crimes.
Last edited:
Dutch there’s truth in that too. People so often forget the world is rarely black or white..
I suspect a lot of what might be said or argued is in the first three paragraphs of this. Including the fact, that the defence for other officers involved was that training was inadequate for stopping excessive force. That’s an admission in their eyes Chauvin was/is guilty.
apnews.com
Couple with the fact he did so for 9 long minutes, nor did he/they get him into a recovery position.
I suspect a lot of what might be said or argued is in the first three paragraphs of this. Including the fact, that the defence for other officers involved was that training was inadequate for stopping excessive force. That’s an admission in their eyes Chauvin was/is guilty.
Defense: 3 officers at Floyd killing not trained adequately
An attorney for one of the three former Minneapolis police officers on trial for allegedly violating George Floyd's civil rights says the police department didn't adequately train new officers on certain policies and taught them to obey their superiors.
apnews.com
Couple with the fact he did so for 9 long minutes, nor did he/they get him into a recovery position.
Nor did he, provide any care which they are obligated to do, once it was obvious even to them he was in distress. Say like CPR
Last edited:
Nothing in the article says he wasn't. I'm sure there were measures in place, otherwise he never would have made it to his bunk the first night...
Yes.
I have googled it.
That's why I know that is an estimate by law enforcement and not - in fact - the LD50.
Because the human LD50 is unknown.
You would also know it isn't 2mg because "2 mg" is not a dose.
It's a flat amount.
11 ng/mL is a dose.
Of course you can die from a small dose - especially if you aren't a habitual user.Of course if your tolerance is high it would take a larger dose.
But if you've never taken fentanyl before, and some unscrupulous drug dealer mixes it with a batch of cocaine, you would probably drop dead at 2 to 3mg.
This has happened before. A lawyer (who I knew) here in Toronto OD'ed because he thought he was just taking cocaine:
Defence lawyer among 3 dead after suspected fentanyl overdose in Toronto apartment
A promising Toronto criminal lawyer has become one of the city’s latest victims in the growing opioid crisis.torontosun.com
He was never into fentanyl.
He was just a weekend coke user.
And now he's dead.
RIP
That means the very fact that Floyd was a user means that you can't use the non-user dose as "proof" of what a lethal dose for him should be.
Last edited:
His highest charge was unintentional second degree murder.
"He didn't intend to kill him" isn't an issue here.
It's not as clear cut as that. Here's the statute:
Sec. 609.19 MN Statutes
www.revisor.mn.gov
Charges under the unintential murders subsection still require either:
a. A commission of a separate felony that leads to the unintentional death. While the death can be unintentional, the separate felony would require intention. The question in the Chauvin case is - what was the separate felony if the arrest and restraint itself was lawful?
or,
b. intentionally inflicting bodily harm on someone who is the restrained under an order for protection (inapplicable to the Floyd case).
Because it was a jury verdict, there is no explanation on the record of what the jury thought was a separate felony. I think that the jury, being ordinary citizens, likely misapplied or failed to apply the statute in an intellectually disciplined way. I think they felt that Chauvin's actions were intended to cause pain to Floyd, and that made the arrest an assault. Unfortunately, they didn't apply enough consideration to the justification for applying a restraint during the arrest that would necessarily cause pain to the suspect. I think it would be very easy for someone with no experience in applying a statute to get confused about this.
Many people will be happy that the verdict came down the way it did. It probably prevented widespread rioting. However, SCOTUS should have conducted a very close review of whether the trial record supports a finding by the jury of separate felony, and whether they were properly instructed. SCOTUS provided no comments in refusing the case.
Third-degree assault, if I remember correctly.
The prosecutors argued that Chauvin assaulted Floyd. The jury didn't have to make up or misapply anything.
You may not think that Chauvin assaulted Floyd, but the jury did.
Proving he did was part of the trial or they couldn't get second degree unintentional murder.
Of course, they also found him guilty of third degree murder and second degree manslaughter - so even with your argument he would still be in jail.
SCOTUS doesn't need to of course.
But also there doesn't seem to be much reason to.
I don't see why the jury finding for the assault would be questioned. It isn't like they had to guess what the assault was or made it up.
Working on the assumption of a few things. It’s so bizarre, asinine and sad anyone has to preface a post with that…….But it is what it is here.
And working off memory.
Does Minneapolis have a 3rd party equivalent of the SIU? If so, I assume those involved were roasted…tarred and feathered, then hung.
Does or would Michigan also have a public coroners inquest. As we do and would have following any death. For what it’s worth I’ve been through the first and will be going through the second…( the process is slow) If so, and if it’s been held to date. Anyone want to guess it’s findings?
No matter how it’s sliced or diced, he and they first and foremost swear oaths, and have a duty of care.
www.shine.com.au
.
Secondly, arguably, more importantly. Law enforcement is part of the establishment/institution…”The public trust”. <<<This being critical, paramount, the be all and end all, however you want to name or label it. Society in the whole has, is, will likely continue to lose the trust if things don’t change right fast.. What follows when they do? Anarchy. Read almost anything on that. Or simply see BLM, Antifa, storming the WH, the G20 here, some of Trumps base, songs about Richmond, etc and so on…over and over and over. There’s just a few dozens signs and manifestations.
As such, they ( Law enforcement) need to be and are, held to higher standards. See 3rd party special investigative units and coroners inquest…And penalties for transgressions of policy, training and in extreme cases when they cross the line. The hammer comes down hard, it’s supposed to and needs to.
And working off memory.
Does Minneapolis have a 3rd party equivalent of the SIU? If so, I assume those involved were roasted…tarred and feathered, then hung.
Does or would Michigan also have a public coroners inquest. As we do and would have following any death. For what it’s worth I’ve been through the first and will be going through the second…( the process is slow) If so, and if it’s been held to date. Anyone want to guess it’s findings?
No matter how it’s sliced or diced, he and they first and foremost swear oaths, and have a duty of care.
Duty of Care | Shine Lawyers
Shine Lawyers' team of injury and compensation lawyers share expertise of Duty of Care claims. On a no win no fee basis. Find out more.
www.shine.com.au
Secondly, arguably, more importantly. Law enforcement is part of the establishment/institution…”The public trust”. <<<This being critical, paramount, the be all and end all, however you want to name or label it. Society in the whole has, is, will likely continue to lose the trust if things don’t change right fast.. What follows when they do? Anarchy. Read almost anything on that. Or simply see BLM, Antifa, storming the WH, the G20 here, some of Trumps base, songs about Richmond, etc and so on…over and over and over. There’s just a few dozens signs and manifestations.
As such, they ( Law enforcement) need to be and are, held to higher standards. See 3rd party special investigative units and coroners inquest…And penalties for transgressions of policy, training and in extreme cases when they cross the line. The hammer comes down hard, it’s supposed to and needs to.
Last edited:
