Opinions large and small, worth everything you pay for them.
The Antifa DA charging him with 2nd degree murder knows what he's doing. 2nd degree means the prosecution must prove intent (me meant to kill him). They can't prove intents, so the crooked cop will walk. Queue the riots.100% deliberate.
The official autopsy killed any attempt at proving the cop messed up. Floyd was deaded by the time he hit the ground, just his body hadn't caught up with his heart yet.Between the autopsy and Minneapolis PD's own use of force rules and procedures.The DA charged him in order to offer up a sacrifice. Hoping the cop would face a jury of the DA's peers.But like with Baltimore, if the cop takes a bench trial, he'll skate.Just like Atlanta. Overbearing and overreaching DA/Prosecutor trying to make his chops with the minority community and virtue signal right and left, and by overbearing and overreaching, will destroy any chance of effective prosecution for any real charge. (Of which, in Atlanta, there were none. Total good shoot. As to Minneapolis? I still say it was an accidental death, unintentional manslaughter at best. Was Chauvan a jerk? Maybe. But any cop knows, both the best and the worst catch a slew of Internal Affairs complaints, bad cops because they suck and good cops because they do their job too well for the criminals' sake.)
I've been saying this since the beginning. Chauvin was not "choking" Floyd, his knee was on the back of Floyd's neck, not the front, and he wasn't using his full weight. He was restraining Floyd with a technique that, although every cop since the video came out says is not an approved method and THEY'D never do it, I've seen it over and over and over again. When someone is struggling, the easiest (and least violent) way to get them under control is to control their head. This has been used by the Police forever. We were even taught techniques similar to that in the military police training (I wasn't a pro...I was assigned to Naval Security as a temporary assignment for a year, but in that year I went from patrolman, to patrol supervisor, to watch commander and the Security Officer offered to send me to investigator school and put me in investigations if I'd volunteer to stay for another three years...I declined).The first time I saw the video I could tell that the cop was not strangling the guy. You could still see Floyd squirming underneath him. Chauvin appeared to me to be using only the amount of pressure necessary to keep him under control, when Floyd thrashed, he increased the pressure, when Floyd relaxed, so did Chauvin.When someone can cry out "I can't breathe" over and over there is one thing for certain: A restricted airway is not the problem.I'm not defending what Chauvin did...They checked Floyd's pulse and knew he was unresponsive two full minutes before Chauvin released the pressure from his neck. That's unacceptable. They made no effort at first aid or resuscitation. That's unacceptable.But is it illegal? I'm not so sure. I looked into Minnesota law and it does stipulate that a police officer is required to render assistance to a suspect that has been shot. It doesn't say anything about rendering assistance to someone who's been restrained and has become unresponsive. Unless there's case law (which I don't have time to research) it's a gray area.Finally, the official autopsy report said there was no evidence of asphyxiation, meaning that Chauvin's knee on the neck didn't kill Floyd. Would Floyd have died had they restrained him in a less aggressive manner? Maybe, maybe not. That's pretty much the definition of "reasonable doubt".The family and their shyster, race baiting lawyers paid an outside forensic examiner who declared that Floyd had been strangled...without even examining the body. He did it by watching the video. Wow...that's credible.I'd say, assuming we don't end up with a politically driven verdict, which does happen, Chauvin is likely to walk. He may be found guilty of a lesser charge but there's no way they'll make the murder charge stick.And Minneapolis will burn.Again.Every time I bring this up with someone they assume I'm defending Chauvin and taking his side. I guess in a way I am, but not the way they mean. The force used on Floyd was excessive, the restraint used was inappropriate and the fact that they held that restraint long after they KNEW that Floyd was in trouble and did nothing to help him is inexcusable.But all of that is common practice in modern policing. Convicting Chauvin and sending him to jail isn't going to stop this from happening again. The cops will be able to say "see, he was just a rogue" and go on with business as usual. Just like has happened time and time again.to be continued. My rant was too Long, had to break it up into separate comments
part 2Yes, there are bad apples in the Police departments all across the US, but that video doesn't prove Chauvin is one of them. It proves he's got poor judgement, sure, but a bad cop? Nope. What it does show, however, is that the policies and procedures used by the police need to change. Heck the entire attitude needs to change.It's not "us against them"; they ARE us and we ARE them. Cops are civilians too. That whole warlike mentality, cops being treated as the enemy by non-cops and cops treating the citizenry as the enemy needs to stop. The Military tactics need to stop. They don't need to roll tanks, throw flash bangs and kick in doors like Seal Team 6 to serve a freaking search warrant...especially when there's even a slim chance they got the address wrong and are kicking in the wrong damn door in the first place (and there's ALWAYS that slim chance...it happens way too often for there not to be).They don't have to rough up everyone they're arresting, even when not resisting. They don't have to "assert their authority" over every situation. And the number one change that needs to be made: They are here to protect and to serve the community, the most important thing is NOT that they get home safe at the end of the day, but that the citizens they are charged to protect do so. If they can't accept that, they need to find a different line of work.
I recall seeing a black guy holding a sign to the effect of "Wait until he's acquitted".This is a set-up, and IMHO will be done in October to rile up the black vote again.
From Sailorcurt. - “When someone can cry out "I can't breathe" over and over there is one thing for certain: A restricted airway is not the problem.“Have you never heard of positional (or postural) asphyxia??? You can say “I can’t breathe” up to the point you lose consciousness. I agree with the majority of your points but have to question how recent, or the quality of your training. A suspect on their chest who doesn’t have use of their hands cannot continue to expand said chest properly. This can lead to decreased O2 and increased CO2. (That’s why you lay babies on their back to sleep.) Add weight on their back or upper chest and this can turn fatal quickly. It also leads to more thrashing - it’s hard wired into all of us - which leads to more restraint. This is from 2019 - If https://www.policemag.com/524139/how-to-prevent-positional-asphyxiaThis is from 1995!! - https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/posasph.pdfThe other point you made questioning whether it was illegal for the cops on scene to not render aid because technically he wasn’t shot is kind of out there. Once you are in custody, what happens to you is that agency and that officer’s responsibility. That had been established at least 4 decades ago when I started working in public safety.
Something I pointed out was that Floyd was Chauvin's prisoner. This makes Floyd Chauvin's responsibility -- and that's why the hammer SHOULD fall on Chauvin (for being criminally negligent, at least). It wouldn't matter if he was kneeling on Floyd's neck, his back, his ankles, or if he was ten feet away flirting with a cute blonde.His responsibility. His error. Anyone here ex-mil? What happens, under the UCMJ, if you allowed a prisoner of war to be injured or killed due to negligence?
"From Sailorcurt. - “When someone can cry out "I can't breathe" over and over there is one thing for certain: A restricted airway is not the problem.“Have you never heard of positional (or postural) asphyxia??? You can say “I can’t breathe” up to the point you lose consciousness. "Yes, I've heard of positional asphyxia. It's caused by their POSITION reducing the ability to draw a breath, not from restricting the airway as in what would traditionally be considered choking. In our training, that's one reason we were encouraged to control the head...trying to hold the torso still requires pressure placed on the shoulders and back, which can contribute to...positional asphyxia.Please refer to the case of Tony Timpa in Dallas (https://www.dallasnews.com/news/investigations/2019/07/31/you-re-gonna-kill-me-dallas-police-body-cam-footage-reveals-the-final-minutes-of-tony-timpa-s-life/). He was being restrained on his belly with the cop's knee in his back rather than on his neck. He died as a result. Strangely there were no riots even after all charges were dropped against the cops who were mocking him as they killed him. That's a classic case of positional asphyxia aggravated by restraint.Chauvin's knee to the neck technique enabled him to control Floyd's head WITHOUT placing undue pressure on his shoulders and back, which I would argue actually reduced the chances of contributing to positional asphyxia.We were trained to control the head with hands, not feet or knees...and a hand to the back of the neck when they were prone was perfectly acceptable. I don't approve of the knee to the neck technique only because it would appear to me to create too much danger of spinal injury. It's too difficult to identify and control the amount of pressure being placed on the neck with an extremity like the knee and if the suspect thrashes, you lose your balance and fall onto his neck with your full weight...that could be bad. But I think the threat of asphyxiation as a direct result is minimal. My opinion only.Another interesting point about positional asphyxia is that people who die of that while being restrained by police also almost uniformly were high on something at the time (including Tony Timpa). In the case of Floyd, he was high on Fentanyl...one of the side effects of which just happens to be slow or shallow breathing.To sum up a too long response, yes, I'm aware of positional asphyxia, but that's not what's being charged here...Chauvin is being accused of choking Floyd out with the knee on the neck and that simply didn't happen.
"Something I pointed out was that Floyd was Chauvin's prisoner. This makes Floyd Chauvin's responsibility -- and that's why the hammer SHOULD fall on Chauvin (for being criminally negligent, at least). It wouldn't matter if he was kneeling on Floyd's neck, his back, his ankles, or if he was ten feet away flirting with a cute blonde.His responsibility. His error. "I don't disagree. I never said he should get off scott free, what I said was that he's very likely to be acquitted of what he's been charged with.The charges were made to appease the mob, not because the prosecutors actually think that's what he's guilty of.My guess is that sometime before trial, after the furor has died down some and the mob has returned to playing fortnite (new and improved without police cars) and watching Maury Povich, the charges will be modified to include some lesser charges like negligent homicide so that when the jury finds he didn't commit murder, they'll still have something they can find him guilty of.Of course, even for that, they'll have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Floyd died as a direct result of Chauvin's negligence...I think that's a long row to hoe based on the autopsy report.
"The other point you made questioning whether it was illegal for the cops on scene to not render aid because technically he wasn’t shot is kind of out there. "I forgot to mention this.I agree, it seems kind of silly to say that if you shoot someone you have to render aid, but if you choke them out you can just let them die, but that's how the law reads. Don't take my word for it, look it up in Minnesota law.There may be case law that has clarified that law to include any type of injury, but as I said in my original post, I don't have time to research case law.
Fair enough Sailorcurt, thanks for the response. I’ve read enough MN laws just governing the taking of game when I used to hunt there to accept at face value that the laws pertaining to this shitshow would be poorly crafted. It will be *really* interesting what happens with the ongoing investigation. Political charges made before an investigation is completed rarely work out well. They usually just prime the next series of, (as Larry said in the first post), Queue the riots.
Post a Comment