George Floyd/Black Lives Matter Protests

[Ralstonite]

1 minute ago, effeffsee_the2nd said:

What is the defense argument likely to come down to? that it was an approved restraint and that the officer "reasonable believed" that Floyd was "at it" with his pleas of I can't breath and that the officer " reasonable believed " that Floyd would kick off if he released his restraint?  so even if that were true, do you just kill someone if their not behaving? I mean I know it's America but come on there were 4 of them and they had the cuffs on him

I haven't watched the full, twenty minute video, but a friend of mine told me Floyd was saying he couldn't breathe before the officer applied the restraint. If it was taught to cops, presumably it was considered non-lethal. If it wasn't considered non-lethal but was taught to cops anyway, then presumably deaths like Floyd's are considered acceptable in America. However, if Floyd was saying he couldn't breathe before the restraint was applied, I would imagine the cop would believe him to be lying.

[Ralstonite]

2 minutes ago, hk blues said:

I don't doubt he was carrying out the restraint as per the manual but the length of time has to be taken into account.  More than likely it say nothing in the manual about timing but then that brings it into the realms of reasonableness.  The jury will have to consider if Chauvin would have known the end result.  If we held someone's head under water for 8.5 minutes, or held them tightly by the throat for that length of time, we would expect someone to die so the same surely applies to the knee to the neck?  Of course, it's Chauvin's lawyers job to throw doubt upon that simple point.

If it was taught to cops, then someone else should be standing in the dock. Chauvin could easily claim that he didn't think he was putting much pressure on Floyd's neck. 

The inappropriate application of a technique which had been taught to him during his police training sounds like negligible homicide rather than murder to me. If Floyd was really 6'4"  was resisting arrest, and had prior convictions for violence, then Chauvin can say he felt he needed to apply the technique. It certainly casts doubt on the accusation that he decided that he intentionally set out to kill Floyd.

Furthermore, I have read that the autopsy report showed that he had a potentially lethal dose of drugs, possibly having swallowed drugs he was carrying, and also had cardiovascular disease. In which case Chauvin's defence could claim that the technique would not have been lethal if applied to a healthy man, and that looking at Floyd there was no reason to believe he wasn't healthy. 

As a juror would that be enough to give you reasonable doubt?

[hk blues]

3 minutes ago, Ralstonite said:

If it was taught to cops, then someone else should be standing in the dock. Chauvin could easily claim that he didn't think he was putting much pressure on Floyd's neck. 

The inappropriate application of a technique which had been taught to him during his police training sounds like negligible homicide rather than murder to me. If Floyd was really 6'4"  was resisting arrest, and had prior convictions for violence, then Chauvin can say he felt he needed to apply the technique. It certainly casts doubt on the accusation that he decided that he intentionally set out to kill Floyd.

Furthermore, I have read that the autopsy report showed that he had a potentially lethal dose of drugs, possibly having swallowed drugs he was carrying, and also had cardiovascular disease. In which case Chauvin's defence could claim that the technique would not have been lethal if applied to a healthy man, and that looking at Floyd there was no reason to believe he wasn't healthy. 

As a juror would that be enough to give you reasonable doubt?

Are you Chauvin's lawyer? 

Seriously though, your question and points are valid but it all boils down to how much the jury buy into the seeds of doubt that Chauvin's lawyer will sew.  I would imagine, based on the amount of publicity this has had, that pretty much every juror would have had Chauvin as guilty as pre-trial and Chauvin's lawyer will now be chipping away at that.  How much he can chip away will decide his (Chauvin's) fate.   Some will stick by their initial thoughts - hopefully enough to make it stick IMO. 

[101]

18 minutes ago, Ralstonite said:

If it was taught to cops, then someone else should be standing in the dock. Chauvin could easily claim that he didn't think he was putting much pressure on Floyd's neck. 

The inappropriate application of a technique which had been taught to him during his police training sounds like negligible homicide rather than murder to me. If Floyd was really 6'4"  was resisting arrest, and had prior convictions for violence, then Chauvin can say he felt he needed to apply the technique. It certainly casts doubt on the accusation that he decided that he intentionally set out to kill Floyd.

Furthermore, I have read that the autopsy report showed that he had a potentially lethal dose of drugs, possibly having swallowed drugs he was carrying, and also had cardiovascular disease. In which case Chauvin's defence could claim that the technique would not have been lethal if applied to a healthy man, and that looking at Floyd there was no reason to believe he wasn't healthy. 

As a juror would that be enough to give you reasonable doubt?

I think CNN said it doesn't matter if say the drugs would have killed him 5 mins later in the state of Minnesota it's only got to be if the jury think it was a significant factor in his death which I think it's difficult to argue that it wasn't.

Also the police officer wouldn't know about previous convictions unless he had arrested Floyd before which I think would have come out by now.

[hk blues]

2 minutes ago, 101 said:

Also the police officer wouldn't know about previous convictions unless he had arrested Floyd before which I think would have come out by now.

It's possible Chauvin know about Floyd's previous convictions though - he was a big guy and maybe Chauvin had seen him around.  I am guessing now but that fact Chauvin's car was in vicinity perhaps suggests he was familiar with that area.  Didn't it also come out that they had worked in the same club/bar but not necessarily that they knew other before the  incident? 

Then again, maybe all black guys do look the same to them! 

[Rugster]

34 minutes ago, Ralstonite said:

If it was taught to cops, then someone else should be standing in the dock. Chauvin could easily claim that he didn't think he was putting much pressure on Floyd's neck. 

The inappropriate application of a technique which had been taught to him during his police training sounds like negligible homicide rather than murder to me. If Floyd was really 6'4"  was resisting arrest, and had prior convictions for violence, then Chauvin can say he felt he needed to apply the technique. It certainly casts doubt on the accusation that he decided that he intentionally set out to kill Floyd.

Furthermore, I have read that the autopsy report showed that he had a potentially lethal dose of drugs, possibly having swallowed drugs he was carrying, and also had cardiovascular disease. In which case Chauvin's defence could claim that the technique would not have been lethal if applied to a healthy man, and that looking at Floyd there was no reason to believe he wasn't healthy. 

As a juror would that be enough to give you reasonable doubt?

It takes seconds to knock someone out using a blood blocking choke hold. He had his knee on the guy's neck for 9 and a half fucking minutes. It's murder, pure and simple and he knew exactly what he was doing. Watch the video.

[19QOS19]

If it was taught to cops, then someone else should be standing in the dock. Chauvin could easily claim that he didn't think he was putting much pressure on Floyd's neck. 
The inappropriate application of a technique which had been taught to him during his police training sounds like negligible homicide rather than murder to me. If Floyd was really 6'4"  was resisting arrest, and had prior convictions for violence, then Chauvin can say he felt he needed to apply the technique. It certainly casts doubt on the accusation that he decided that he intentionally set out to kill Floyd.
Furthermore, I have read that the autopsy report showed that he had a potentially lethal dose of drugs, possibly having swallowed drugs he was carrying, and also had cardiovascular disease. In which case Chauvin's defence could claim that the technique would not have been lethal if applied to a healthy man, and that looking at Floyd there was no reason to believe he wasn't healthy. 
As a juror would that be enough to give you reasonable doubt?

What's his reason for continuing to apply this technique after the guy has clearly passed out? The technique itself I wouldn't be opposed to if it was a copper on his own to get a 'perp' under control. Even then surely the pressure can be relieved a bit and the threat of the copper pressing down is enough to keep the 'criminal' restrained?

In Floyd's case there was absolutely no need for him to be kneeling on his neck at all though. Two fully grown men on his body, Floyd handcuffed lying prone and two other armed coppers available. Unless Floyd could have got to a can of fucking spinach there was no chance he was overpowering all 4 cops.

It's just appalling policing and he should be locked up. I'm genuinely looking forward to hearing his justification.

[Ralstonite]

39 minutes ago, 19QOS19 said:

 

 

What's his reason for continuing to apply this technique after the guy has clearly passed out? The technique itself I wouldn't be opposed to if it was a copper on his own to get a 'perp' under control. Even then surely the pressure can be relieved a bit and the threat of the copper pressing down is enough to keep the 'criminal' restrained?

In Floyd's case there was absolutely no need for him to be kneeling on his neck at all though. Two fully grown men on his body, Floyd handcuffed lying prone and two other armed coppers available. Unless Floyd could have got to a can of fucking spinach there was no chance he was overpowering all 4 cops.

It's just appalling policing and he should be locked up. I'm genuinely looking forward to hearing his justification.

 

I don't think anyone can be expected to know the mind of a third party, we can only speculate. Hence why there's a trial and the defendant is allowed to provide his explanation.

However, I will speculate that if Chauvin didn't believe the pressure he was applying was enough to render Floyd unconscious, then I would imagine he didn't know he had passed out. The eyes are possibly the best way of determining whether someone's passed out, and he couldn't see them from the position he was in. It could be argued that the body would go limp, though if he had a heart attack would his body be convulsing, which Chauvin misread as resistance? Again, speculation on my part.

I agree, it is appalling policing. I think many police officers, here and abroad, are bullies. However I still think Chauvin's entitled to a fair trial. Saying he deserves to be locked up without hearing his defence is akin to those who say Floyd was a criminal and a thug and deserved to die, IMHO.

I just don't see it likely that Chauvin would risk everything - particularly given that he was aware he was being filmed - to kill some guy he was arresting. I don't believe Chauvin thought Floyd was going to die. Again though, I am speculating.

1 hour ago, 101 said:

I think CNN said it doesn't matter if say the drugs would have killed him 5 mins later in the state of Minnesota it's only got to be if the jury think it was a significant factor in his death which I think it's difficult to argue that it wasn't.

Also the police officer wouldn't know about previous convictions unless he had arrested Floyd before which I think would have come out by now.

But was it not a case of the adrenaline, the deprivation of oxygen and his poor cardiovascular system and intoxication which killed him? That's one for the medical experts to answer. I'm not sure how long Chauvin had been a police officer, but was this the first time he had ever used this restraint? Was it the longest? To repeat what I said above: 'I just don't see it likely that Chauvin would risk everything - particularly given that he was aware he was being filmed - to kill some guy he was arresting. I don't believe Chauvin thought Floyd was going to die.'

1 hour ago, Rugster said:

It takes seconds to knock someone out using a blood blocking choke hold. He had his knee on the guy's neck for 9 and a half fucking minutes. It's murder, pure and simple and he knew exactly what he was doing. Watch the video.

It does. I have been knocked unconscious by one, they are extremely effective. I think it's disgusting that the police were ever allowed to use them. But to reiterate what I said above, for the third time: 'I just don't see it likely that Chauvin would risk everything - particularly given that he was aware he was being filmed - to kill some guy he was arresting. I don't believe Chauvin thought Floyd was going to die.'

[hk blues]

3 minutes ago, Ralstonite said:

 But to reiterate what I said above, for the third time: 'I just don't see it likely that Chauvin would risk everything - particularly given that he was aware he was being filmed - to kill some guy he was arresting. I don't believe Chauvin thought Floyd was going to die.'

I agree with much of what you've posted, right to a fair trial and all that, but I don't find the last part so compelling.  People do all sorts of nonsensical things for inexplicable reasons.  How many times have we seem footage of absolutely disgraceful behaviour from police (both sides of the Atlantic)  when  they are well aware they are being filmed?  Also, it's possible Chauvin felt he was above the law and, based on things we all know go on here never mind over there, he may have had every reason to think he was.  

[Rugster]

12 minutes ago, Ralstonite said:

. But to reiterate what I said above, for the third time: 'I just don't see it likely that Chauvin would risk everything - particularly given that he was aware he was being filmed - to kill some guy he was arresting. I don't believe Chauvin thought Floyd was going to die.'

He probably thought he was going to get away with it, regardless of being filmed or not, just like he got away with his 18 or so other complaints raised against him during his time in the force. He had a Body Cam on in any case and carried on. 

[101]

11 minutes ago, Ralstonite said:

I don't believe Chauvin thought Floyd was going to die

I do. He took Floyd out of the patrol car and executed him, maybe emotive language but police officers in America can and do act with impunity when the deal with non white people.

[Ralstonite]

5 minutes ago, 101 said:

I do. He took Floyd out of the patrol car and executed him, maybe emotive language but police officers in America can and do act with impunity when the deal with non white people.

Certainly that's the narrative, though I'm not sure the statistics confirm that. I think police in America tend to be more violent. Full stop. The racial motive is more speculation, and given that Chauvin was married to a 'person of colour' and had been raising his step-children for ten years, the idea that he woke up and thought "I'm gonna kill me a n****r" is cynical conjecture; the sort of thing that causes racial tension and distrust.

[hk blues]

2 minutes ago, 101 said:

I do. He took Floyd out of the patrol car and executed him, maybe emotive language but police officers in America can and do act with impunity when the deal with non white people.

I don't think he really gave a f**k about Floyd either way, he was too caught in the moment of having his authority questioned by a few pesky black folk.  

Most of us have no concept of the reality of everyday life in countries where the polis can act with impunity.  where I am a couple of months ago an off-duty senior police officer shot dead a mother and her son over a petty squabble in their neighbourhood.  He did this on video and in full view of his own daughter and some other neighbours.

[Honest_Man#1]

Am I right in saying this character is the St Mirren fan who did FM videos in his PJs with his mum in the background, and was banned for being a Holocaust denier?

[Moomintroll]

4 minutes ago, Honest_Man#1 said:

Am I right in saying this character is the St Mirren fan who did FM videos in his PJs with his mum in the background, and was banned for being a Holocaust denier?

Sure that was Wisbit, now known as Munoz.

[Ira Gaines]

6 minutes ago, Perkin Flump said:

Sure that was Wisbit, now known as Munoz.

Correct.

[NotThePars]

I don't know if Chauvin thought Floyd was going to die. I'm fully convinced he didn't give a shit if he did. He wasn't concerned enough to stop applying force for a ludicrous amount of time which either makes him uncaring or a fucking moron who shouldn't have been employed in the first place. 

 

[Gordon EF]

15 minutes ago, NotThePars said:

I don't know if Chauvin thought Floyd was going to die. I'm fully convinced he didn't give a shit if he did. He wasn't concerned enough to stop applying force for a ludicrous amount of time which either makes him uncaring or a fucking moron who shouldn't have been employed in the first place. 

 

This. It's why folk should calm down about first degree murder etc. Trying to pin a deliberate, planned, racially-motivated murder on the guy is an absolute non-starter and those accusations would almost certainly not lead to convictions. What he clearly did was act in a way that showed complete and utter disregard for George Floyd's safety and his life. In terms of the case against Chauvin, that's all that's needed to convict him or murder. Any personal motive folk want to ascribe beyond that is their own opinion. But it's not stuff you can prove.

 

[The Moonster]

3 hours ago, Ralstonite said:

Certainly that's the narrative, though I'm not sure the statistics confirm that. I think police in America tend to be more violent. Full stop. The racial motive is more speculation, and given that Chauvin was married to a 'person of colour' and had been raising his step-children for ten years, the idea that he woke up and thought "I'm gonna kill me a n****r" is cynical conjecture; the sort of thing that causes racial tension and distrust.

His wife isn't black. She was born in Laos. How would that have any effect on his feelings towards black people?

You are 100% FTW. 

[carpetmonster]

5 hours ago, Ralstonite said:

Certainly that's the narrative, though I'm not sure the statistics confirm that. I think police in America tend to be more violent. Full stop. The racial motive is more speculation, and given that Chauvin was married to a 'person of colour' and had been raising his step-children for ten years, the idea that he woke up and thought "I'm gonna kill me a n****r" is cynical conjecture; the sort of thing that causes racial tension and distrust.

The statistics absolutely confirm it

https://www.pnas.org/content/116/34/16793