(08-04-2020, 09:21 AM)TrivialPursuit Wrote: [ -> ]Watching that video...
George Floyd repeatedly resisted arrest. Repeatedly.
I WISH JSO was as accommodating as those officers were. JSO would have just bashed his head against the top of the car, said he was resisting with physical force, thrown him in the car and called it a day. He caused his own death by just not getting in the car. Claustrophobic? The video STARTS with him IN a car with ALL windows rolled UP.
I had the exact same thoughts. If you are in a vehicle to start with, you can get in the back of a SUV with the windows rolled down.
(08-04-2020, 09:29 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]Had a conversation yesterday with a guy about this stuff. Black guy, city worker, not dumb by any means. I said something to the effect of "Can we agree that those cops didn't start the day thinking "Man, I can't wait to kill a black guy today!" at least?" Immediate response was "No! I think they did! It's what they all want."
How can we find common ground with that?
That is the biggest problem with the current "movement". Most of those people think everyone is out to get them or keep them down. No one is reasonable and looking at both sides.
I do think the cop that pulled his gun didn't need to, but that is probably on the training and not putting him in stressful situations. Then allowing him to get out of the squad car was a serious blunder.
(08-04-2020, 10:02 AM)p_rushing Wrote: [ -> ] (08-04-2020, 09:21 AM)TrivialPursuit Wrote: [ -> ]Watching that video...
George Floyd repeatedly resisted arrest. Repeatedly.
I WISH JSO was as accommodating as those officers were. JSO would have just bashed his head against the top of the car, said he was resisting with physical force, thrown him in the car and called it a day. He caused his own death by just not getting in the car. Claustrophobic? The video STARTS with him IN a car with ALL windows rolled UP.
I had the exact same thoughts. If you are in a vehicle to start with, you can get in the back of a SUV with the windows rolled down.
(08-04-2020, 09:29 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]Had a conversation yesterday with a guy about this stuff. Black guy, city worker, not dumb by any means. I said something to the effect of "Can we agree that those cops didn't start the day thinking "Man, I can't wait to kill a black guy today!" at least?" Immediate response was "No! I think they did! It's what they all want."
How can we find common ground with that?
That is the biggest problem with the current "movement". Most of those people think everyone is out to get them or keep them down. No one is reasonable and looking at both sides.
I do think the cop that pulled his gun didn't need to, but that is probably on the training and not putting him in stressful situations. Then allowing him to get out of the squad car was a serious blunder.
I think pulling his gun was actually the right call... he couldn't see Floyd's right hand and took forever to comply with putting both hands on the wheel.
The one thing I noticed was that he was complaining that he couldn't breathe before going to the ground.
(08-04-2020, 12:44 PM)JagNGeorgia Wrote: [ -> ]The one thing I noticed was that he was complaining that he couldn't breathe before going to the ground.
Which, in turn, made the cops disbelieve him when he said it on the ground.
The point that video clearly makes.. it should never have gotten to that point. Not even close... and I think it's because the Police were initially very soft with him especially compared to my own personal interaction with Police in Jacksonville.
(08-04-2020, 03:40 AM)p_rushing Wrote: [ -> ]Body cams were leaked. Filled in some gaps and info no one reported. Shows some poor training and actions from the rookie cops 1st there to pull his gun. Drugs were definitely an issue. Somehow he got out of the squad car after they got him in it.
It was poor policing and someone on drugs with potential mental issues that caused this. It is going to be hard to convict the 3 cops as there was even a question from one about turning him on his side since he was crashing from the adrenaline and drugs.
The senior cop may get convicted of murder but I see why he didn't want to move him. He arrived on the scene late, knows 2 cops needed backup, he somehow got out of the squad car, the 2 cops think he is on drugs, so once they got him back secure he didn't want to move him until the ambulance was there. He broke protocol and used a banned technique and didn't stop when he was secured. He also didn't protect him when he was crashing. Not sure what the murder law language is, but it may be too strict for a conviction.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article...-time.html
That leaked body cam footage answers what I have been saying all along. There was a reason why he was on the ground and being restrained.
Based on the limited evidence that I have seen, it is my opinion that if this goes to court as charged all three officers will be acquitted (rightfully so). It will be hard to prove to 12 jurors
beyond a shadow of a doubt that there was any intent to commit murder.
(08-04-2020, 10:02 AM)p_rushing Wrote: [ -> ] (08-04-2020, 09:21 AM)TrivialPursuit Wrote: [ -> ]Watching that video...
George Floyd repeatedly resisted arrest. Repeatedly.
I WISH JSO was as accommodating as those officers were. JSO would have just bashed his head against the top of the car, said he was resisting with physical force, thrown him in the car and called it a day. He caused his own death by just not getting in the car. Claustrophobic? The video STARTS with him IN a car with ALL windows rolled UP.
I had the exact same thoughts. If you are in a vehicle to start with, you can get in the back of a SUV with the windows rolled down.
(08-04-2020, 09:29 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]Had a conversation yesterday with a guy about this stuff. Black guy, city worker, not dumb by any means. I said something to the effect of "Can we agree that those cops didn't start the day thinking "Man, I can't wait to kill a black guy today!" at least?" Immediate response was "No! I think they did! It's what they all want."
How can we find common ground with that?
That is the biggest problem with the current "movement". Most of those people think everyone is out to get them or keep them down. No one is reasonable and looking at both sides.
I do think the cop that pulled his gun didn't need to, but that is probably on the training and not putting him in stressful situations. Then allowing him to get out of the squad car was a serious blunder.
I somewhat disagree with the part in bold. It appears that the cop couldn't see Floyd's right hand. Drawing the weapon to a close/ready position is defensive. Where I think the cop made a mistake was allowing the suspect to see it.
(08-04-2020, 02:11 PM)TrivialPursuit Wrote: [ -> ] (08-04-2020, 12:44 PM)JagNGeorgia Wrote: [ -> ]The one thing I noticed was that he was complaining that he couldn't breathe before going to the ground.
Which, in turn, made the cops disbelieve him when he said it on the ground.
The point that video clearly makes.. it should never have gotten to that point. Not even close... and I think it's because the Police were initially very soft with him especially compared to my own personal interaction with Police in Jacksonville.
Going too "soft" on him initially is not criminal.
Putting their knees on his back and neck for as long as they did is criminal, regardless of what happened before.
They should only have had their body weight on him, if at all, for just long enough to put more or stronger cuffs on him, then get off.
(08-04-2020, 02:11 PM)TrivialPursuit Wrote: [ -> ] (08-04-2020, 12:44 PM)JagNGeorgia Wrote: [ -> ]The one thing I noticed was that he was complaining that he couldn't breathe before going to the ground.
Which, in turn, made the cops disbelieve him when he said it on the ground.
The point that video clearly makes.. it should never have gotten to that point. Not even close... and I think it's because the Police were initially very soft with him especially compared to my own personal interaction with Police in Jacksonville.
More than likely. He seemed that his cardiac arrest started during his arrest which would explain his not feeling as though he could breathe.
They were soft with him, but I don't think it would have changed anything had they man handled him. I think his behavior was exacerbated by his medical condition.
(08-04-2020, 02:29 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ] (08-04-2020, 03:40 AM)p_rushing Wrote: [ -> ]Body cams were leaked. Filled in some gaps and info no one reported. Shows some poor training and actions from the rookie cops 1st there to pull his gun. Drugs were definitely an issue. Somehow he got out of the squad car after they got him in it.
It was poor policing and someone on drugs with potential mental issues that caused this. It is going to be hard to convict the 3 cops as there was even a question from one about turning him on his side since he was crashing from the adrenaline and drugs.
The senior cop may get convicted of murder but I see why he didn't want to move him. He arrived on the scene late, knows 2 cops needed backup, he somehow got out of the squad car, the 2 cops think he is on drugs, so once they got him back secure he didn't want to move him until the ambulance was there. He broke protocol and used a banned technique and didn't stop when he was secured. He also didn't protect him when he was crashing. Not sure what the murder law language is, but it may be too strict for a conviction.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article...-time.html
That leaked body cam footage answers what I have been saying all along. There was a reason why he was on the ground and being restrained.
Based on the limited evidence that I have seen, it is my opinion that if this goes to court as charged all three officers will be acquitted (rightfully so). It will be hard to prove to 12 jurors beyond a shadow of a doubt that there was any intent to commit murder.
The other officers are absolutely getting acquitted.
There's enough doubt here that they may be able to prove it was a medical episode and not murder. I could see them catching some other charge about not providing care to someone in their custody.
(08-04-2020, 02:33 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ] (08-04-2020, 10:02 AM)p_rushing Wrote: [ -> ]I had the exact same thoughts. If you are in a vehicle to start with, you can get in the back of a SUV with the windows rolled down.
That is the biggest problem with the current "movement". Most of those people think everyone is out to get them or keep them down. No one is reasonable and looking at both sides.
I do think the cop that pulled his gun didn't need to, but that is probably on the training and not putting him in stressful situations. Then allowing him to get out of the squad car was a serious blunder.
I somewhat disagree with the part in bold. It appears that the cop couldn't see Floyd's right hand. Drawing the weapon to a close/ready position is defensive. Where I think the cop made a mistake was allowing the suspect to see it.
Having it out when you don't need it is better than not having it when you do need it that's for sure.
(08-04-2020, 04:28 PM)JagNGeorgia Wrote: [ -> ] (08-04-2020, 02:11 PM)TrivialPursuit Wrote: [ -> ]Which, in turn, made the cops disbelieve him when he said it on the ground.
The point that video clearly makes.. it should never have gotten to that point. Not even close... and I think it's because the Police were initially very soft with him especially compared to my own personal interaction with Police in Jacksonville.
More than likely. He seemed that his cardiac arrest started during his arrest which would explain his not feeling as though he could breathe.
They were soft with him, but I don't think it would have changed anything had they man handled him. I think his behavior was exacerbated by his medical condition.
(08-04-2020, 02:29 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ]That leaked body cam footage answers what I have been saying all along. There was a reason why he was on the ground and being restrained.
Based on the limited evidence that I have seen, it is my opinion that if this goes to court as charged all three officers will be acquitted (rightfully so). It will be hard to prove to 12 jurors beyond a shadow of a doubt that there was any intent to commit murder.
The other officers are absolutely getting acquitted.
There's enough doubt here that they may be able to prove it was a medical episode and not murder. I could see them catching some other charge about not providing care to someone in their custody.
(08-04-2020, 02:33 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ]I somewhat disagree with the part in bold. It appears that the cop couldn't see Floyd's right hand. Drawing the weapon to a close/ready position is defensive. Where I think the cop made a mistake was allowing the suspect to see it.
Having it out when you don't need it is better than not having it when you do need it that's for sure.
I agree on both points that you made.
Regarding the first point, my thought is it's not up to the defense to prove that the cause of death was a medical episode, though that's what it looks like to me. It's up to the prosecution to prove the
intent to kill. I have seen no evidence (though I have only seen what was made public) that would lead me to believe that the intent was to kill the man.
As far as the second point, I personally drew my weapon during traffic stops when I felt that I needed to. I usually either kept it down by my thigh or had it pointed in the proper direction next to my hip. The point is that the people who were in the vehicle(s) never even knew that I had drawn the weapon in the first place. It was solely for my protection if I felt uncomfortable about a situation. I don't disagree with the officer drawing his weapon, but I disagree with the way that he "brandished" it.
Having said that, I believe if anything the charge should be something like an involuntary manslaughter at the most. It was pretty obvious to me that the man was having some kind of psychological issue whether the influence of drugs or otherwise. The point when he physically started "going downhill" should have been the point that they rendered medical aide. Again, it's hard to know what was going through the officers' minds. They are trying to take a very large man into custody that clearly had mental problems.
Unfortunately, the "court of public opinion" has already convicted the officers without knowing all of the facts.
Does anyone else find it odd that the two officers that had only been on the job for a week were assigned together or did I mis-read the article?
(08-05-2020, 08:49 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]And to make matters worse...
Minneapolis commission takes up proposal to disband police
MINNEAPOLIS – A Minneapolis commission is expected to take up a proposed amendment Wednesday that would dismantle the city’s Police Department in the wake of George Floyd's death and replace it with a new public safety department.
A majority of the City Council backs the idea, with supporters saying it would do away with a troubled department that has resisted change, and replace it with a more “holistic” and public health-oriented approach to public safety...
As all the criminals in the city start salivating at the new levels of crime they will be able to commit. Meanwhile any hard working, honest folks are packing their [BLEEP] to go.
(08-04-2020, 07:09 PM)jagibelieve Wrote: [ -> ] (08-04-2020, 04:28 PM)JagNGeorgia Wrote: [ -> ]More than likely. He seemed that his cardiac arrest started during his arrest which would explain his not feeling as though he could breathe.
They were soft with him, but I don't think it would have changed anything had they man handled him. I think his behavior was exacerbated by his medical condition.
The other officers are absolutely getting acquitted.
There's enough doubt here that they may be able to prove it was a medical episode and not murder. I could see them catching some other charge about not providing care to someone in their custody.
Having it out when you don't need it is better than not having it when you do need it that's for sure.
I agree on both points that you made.
Regarding the first point, my thought is it's not up to the defense to prove that the cause of death was a medical episode, though that's what it looks like to me. It's up to the prosecution to prove the intent to kill. I have seen no evidence (though I have only seen what was made public) that would lead me to believe that the intent was to kill the man.
As far as the second point, I personally drew my weapon during traffic stops when I felt that I needed to. I usually either kept it down by my thigh or had it pointed in the proper direction next to my hip. The point is that the people who were in the vehicle(s) never even knew that I had drawn the weapon in the first place. It was solely for my protection if I felt uncomfortable about a situation. I don't disagree with the officer drawing his weapon, but I disagree with the way that he "brandished" it.
Having said that, I believe if anything the charge should be something like an involuntary manslaughter at the most. It was pretty obvious to me that the man was having some kind of psychological issue whether the influence of drugs or otherwise. The point when he physically started "going downhill" should have been the point that they rendered medical aide. Again, it's hard to know what was going through the officers' minds. They are trying to take a very large man into custody that clearly had mental problems.
Unfortunately, the "court of public opinion" has already convicted the officers without knowing all of the facts.
Intent to kill is usually part of first degree murder. We'd have to read Minnesota law, but there is second and third degree murder and manslaughter in the law, and certainly intent to kill is not required for at least some of these crimes.
Putting your knee on a man's neck to restrain him is criminal, especially when done for that long.
(08-05-2020, 09:17 AM)Jagwired Wrote: [ -> ] (08-05-2020, 08:49 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]And to make matters worse...
Minneapolis commission takes up proposal to disband police
MINNEAPOLIS – A Minneapolis commission is expected to take up a proposed amendment Wednesday that would dismantle the city’s Police Department in the wake of George Floyd's death and replace it with a new public safety department.
A majority of the City Council backs the idea, with supporters saying it would do away with a troubled department that has resisted change, and replace it with a more “holistic” and public health-oriented approach to public safety...
As all the criminals in the city start salivating at the new levels of crime they will be able to commit. Meanwhile any hard working, honest folks are packing their [BLEEP] to go.
Man... I think we could just take over that whole state.
They think the cops in that situation were bad... hahahahahahaha.... hahaha.... and they watched that tape... and they thought, wow, those officers should have just let that crazy guy go and get some holistic medicine and incense sticks. Seriously.. what a weak city.
(08-05-2020, 10:05 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Putting your knee on a man's neck to restrain him is criminal, especially when done for that long.
To be specific, the officer putting a knee on his neck wasn't criminal. It's the choking that becomes criminal.
(08-05-2020, 07:43 AM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]Does anyone else find it odd that the two officers that had only been on the job for a week were assigned together or did I mis-read the article?
I'm interested in this as well, I have no idea how assignments are made for patrol.
(08-06-2020, 08:24 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (08-05-2020, 07:43 AM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]Does anyone else find it odd that the two officers that had only been on the job for a week were assigned together or did I mis-read the article?
I'm interested in this as well, I have no idea how assignments are made for patrol.
I just cannot imagine any police department assigning two rookies to the same patrol. You are just begging for trouble.
Burn some sage, that ought a do it...lol. What a [BLEEP] hole
(08-06-2020, 12:17 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ] (08-06-2020, 08:24 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]I'm interested in this as well, I have no idea how assignments are made for patrol.
I just cannot imagine any police department assigning two rookies to the same patrol. You are just begging for trouble.
There's very few JSO assignments that are more than one officer. The idea of patrol partners isn't really a thing here.
(08-06-2020, 12:17 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ] (08-06-2020, 08:24 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]I'm interested in this as well, I have no idea how assignments are made for patrol.
I just cannot imagine any police department assigning two rookies to the same patrol. You are just begging for trouble.
It happens all the time. It's my understanding that one was actively with his training officer, and the other one had already been trained and was within his first few weeks alone. They may not have been patrolling the same area, either. They could have responded to a request for assistance and come from another area whereby they never would have been working together otherwise.