Iconic Bookstore Burned Down In Riots

TFLYTSNBN wrote:And here we have the information that has been withheld from the public:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/05/ ... yds-death/

The fact that the police had already gotten Floyd into the police car then removed him is an astounding revelation to me. Kneeling on his neck was obviously an idiotic restraint technique. However; given the additional information I am inclined to believe that the officer was attempting to prevent the suspect from injuring themself while they waited for an ambulance which was already enroute.

More info coming out all the time. Last night Chis Cuomo interviewed the man in company with Floyd at the time of his arrest. What came out of that was that the police never tried to approach Floyd peaceably, but immediately using force to extract him from his own vehicle.

One caution with NR article... It doesn't mention that there was a competing autopsy that disagreed with the official one over the cause of death. Further the premise of the article seemed predicated on the official autopsy. That doesn't completely discredit the article, but it does mean handle with extreme caution.

Don

-

I was actually amazed that the primary officer appears to have been charged with the correct charge.

The usual trick is to use the wrong charge to get a not-guilty.

Annachie wrote:I was actually amazed that the primary officer appears to have been charged with the correct charge.

The usual trick is to use the wrong charge to get a not-guilty.

Well that lasted a long time.

Annachie wrote:

Annachie wrote:I was actually amazed that the primary officer appears to have been charged with the correct charge.

The usual trick is to use the wrong charge to get a not-guilty.

Well that lasted a long time.

Tow things:

1) There have been some lawyers who've said that a 3rd degree murder charge would actually be a worse fit and harder to prove than 2nd.

2) It appears Minnesota law allows the jury to convict on a lesser charge, so they could decide to acquit for 2nd and convict to 3rd even if the prosecutor doesn't offer it as an option.

It's the intentional, reckless, negligant, or just damn unlucky problem.

I think we can rule out intentional, so no 1st degree.
Difficulty in showing a base crime makes reckless a challange which puts 2nd degree under pressure.

And I'm not 100% sure that negligent hits 2nd degree in this case. (More reading required)

But lesser included's should help. If it suddenly becomes one charge, well that wouldn't be good.

n7axw wrote:

TFLYTSNBN wrote:And here we have the information that has been withheld from the public:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/05/ ... yds-death/

The fact that the police had already gotten Floyd into the police car then removed him is an astounding revelation to me. Kneeling on his neck was obviously an idiotic restraint technique. However; given the additional information I am inclined to believe that the officer was attempting to prevent the suspect from injuring themself while they waited for an ambulance which was already enroute.

More info coming out all the time. Last night Chis Cuomo interviewed the man in company with Floyd at the time of his arrest. What came out of that was that the police never tried to approach Floyd peaceably, but immediately using force to extract him from his own vehicle.

One caution with NR article... It doesn't mention that there was a competing autopsy that disagreed with the official one over the cause of death. Further the premise of the article seemed predicated on the official autopsy. That doesn't completely discredit the article, but it does mean handle with extreme caution.

Don

-

I believe that the National Review article was written prior to the autopsy by Dr Baden. More importantly, Baden's "autopsy" was based on viewing the video rather than examination of the body. I would expect better of Baden.

I do not consider the interview with Floyd's friend to be definitive evidence. I know from bitter personal experience how eagerly people will lie and even commit perjury to help their friends. This is especially true if they might benefit from a big payout from a lawsuit.

Annachie wrote:It's the intentional, reckless, negligant, or just damn unlucky problem.

I think we can rule out intentional, so no 1st degree.
Difficulty in showing a base crime makes reckless a challange which puts 2nd degree under pressure.

And I'm not 100% sure that negligent hits 2nd degree in this case. (More reading required)

But lesser included's should help. If it suddenly becomes one charge, well that wouldn't be good.

I am not sure what was intended. What did those guys think they were accomplishing? What did they think the result at the end of what they were doing would be?

Of the four police officers involved, Derek Chauvin was the most esperienced and had numerous complaints on his record included involvement in a fatal shooting. We should be careful about judging that since we don't have circumstances or details. He was known as a sometimes overly aggressive cop. Lest we think that bad behavior respects ethnic lines, the most most experienced of the three cops Chauvin had with him was Tou Thao, an officer with roughly 10 years of service who had several complaints against him, including one that resulted in a lawsuit resulting in a payout of 25000 dollars. The other two guys were new recruits with less than a weeks service.

Don

-

TFLYTSNBN wrote:
I believe that the National Review article was written prior to the autopsy by Dr Baden. More importantly, Baden's "autopsy" was based on viewing the video rather than examination of the body. I would expect better of Baden.

I do not consider the interview with Floyd's friend to be definitive evidence. I know from bitter personal experience how eagerly people will lie and even commit perjury to help their friends. This is especially true if they might benefit from a big payout from a lawsuit.

The NR is a source I take seriously even though I discount its political spin. Mostly though it gets its facts straight which for me is the heart of the matter. So I am not saying to discount them. Just be cautious.

In a court of law, what Floyd's friend said would be regarded evidence, circumstantial evidence, perhaps, but evidence. How critical or definitive would ultimately be decided by the court. I doubt that it would stand alone. There will be other witnesses on the scene who will either collaborate or deny what Floyd's friend said. The resulting in a picture that will be a mosaic. Undoubtedly he will be called as a witness.

Don

-

TFLYTSNBN wrote:And here we have the information that has been withheld from the public:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/05/ ... yds-death/

The fact that the police had already gotten Floyd into the police car then removed him is an astounding revelation to me. Kneeling on his neck was obviously an idiotic restraint technique. However; given the additional information I am inclined to believe that the officer was attempting to prevent the suspect from injuring themself while they waited for an ambulance which was already enroute.

I don't see how that makes a difference even if true. Use of that chokehold was specifically banned and Chauvin continued to hold it for approximately two minutes after Floyd no longer had a pulse. Either of those would probably suffice for a murder charge (probably felony murder in the first case) as even the autopsy your article quotes (which is in opposition to the second autopsy) indicates Floyd's health problems were contributing factors but did not cause his death without the choke.

Eyal wrote:

TFLYTSNBN wrote:And here we have the information that has been withheld from the public:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/05/ ... yds-death/

The fact that the police had already gotten Floyd into the police car then removed him is an astounding revelation to me. Kneeling on his neck was obviously an idiotic restraint technique. However; given the additional information I am inclined to believe that the officer was attempting to prevent the suspect from injuring themself while they waited for an ambulance which was already enroute.

I don't see how that makes a difference even if true. Use of that chokehold was specifically banned and Chauvin continued to hold it for approximately two minutes after Floyd no longer had a pulse. Either of those would probably suffice for a murder charge (probably felony murder in the first case) as even the autopsy your article quotes (which is in opposition to the second autopsy) indicates Floyd's health problems were contributing factors but did not cause his death without the choke.

We are actually somewhat in agreement here. I'm not certain what the policy regarding choke holds is for the Minnaepolis police department. Choke holds are inherently dangerous but can be an effective, non-lethal restraint technique if employed with extreme caution. Most American police departments have banned choke holds because of the risks. Unfortunately; many other techniques and less lethal weapons have also been banned. The result is often more rapid escalation to lethal force, particularly firearms.

IMHO, using a choke old on a suspect that is already hand cuffed was insane. However; restraining a handcuffed suspect that was going bizerk by other means would also have been ugly if caught on camera.