Chauvin shivved
-
I can agree with a negligent homicide verdict.
Second degree murder is a couple of bridges too far.
@Jolly said in Chauvin shivved:
I can agree with a negligent homicide verdict.
Second degree murder is a couple of bridges too far.
Not under Minnesota law. Murder 2 (unintentional) in Minnesota is similar to Felony Murder in other states. The felony in this case is Assault. Once Floyd is on the ground and in restraints, every moment Chauvin has his knee on his chest or neck is Assault. Felony assault. Floyd’s drug overdose, Sickle Cell, etc.. is irrelevant from that moment. And he held it for 9 fucking minutes.
Chauvin’s a pig in the most pejorative sense, and I am pro-cop. When a cop crosses the line, it needs to be settled severely and publicly.
The Brad
-
@Jolly said in Chauvin shivved:
I can agree with a negligent homicide verdict.
Second degree murder is a couple of bridges too far.
Not under Minnesota law. Murder 2 (unintentional) in Minnesota is similar to Felony Murder in other states. The felony in this case is Assault. Once Floyd is on the ground and in restraints, every moment Chauvin has his knee on his chest or neck is Assault. Felony assault. Floyd’s drug overdose, Sickle Cell, etc.. is irrelevant from that moment. And he held it for 9 fucking minutes.
Chauvin’s a pig in the most pejorative sense, and I am pro-cop. When a cop crosses the line, it needs to be settled severely and publicly.
@LuFins-Dad said in Chauvin shivved:
@Jolly said in Chauvin shivved:
I can agree with a negligent homicide verdict.
Second degree murder is a couple of bridges too far.
Not under Minnesota law. Murder 2 (unintentional) in Minnesota is similar to Felony Murder in other states. The felony in this case is Assault. Once Floyd is on the ground and in restraints, every moment Chauvin has his knee on his chest or neck is Assault. Felony assault. Floyd’s drug overdose, Sickle Cell, etc.. is irrelevant from that moment. And he held it for 9 fucking minutes.
Chauvin’s a pig in the most pejorative sense, and I am pro-cop. When a cop crosses the line, it needs to be settled severely and publicly.
Define restraints.
-
Unconscious and handcuffed would count.
The Brad
-
@Horace said in Chauvin shivved:
The cost in life, limb, and property incurred by this particular poetic truth would be bad enough. But I fear that, in the aftermath, when the embers have cooled and Chauvin’s name has been forgotten by everyone save his family, the true danger of the poetic truth of George Floyd will come to fruition. It will be written in books alongside uncontroversial facts, treated with the passive acceptance of any other historical occurrence, and absorbed into the storehouse of common knowledge that binds us as a culture. The deep epistemic corruption at the heart of the affair will become, if it goes unchallenged, imperceptible to future generations, simply more evidence that the world is as the poetic truth has determined it to be.
This well captures the insidiousness of the "right side of history" folks. The implication of the term is that one is sacrificing current reputation to speak a truth that will be vindicated from a future perspective, as virtuous. But in fact, they are speaking a socially advantageous falsehood, which will be viewed by historians in the future as truth, because they are writing the falsehood into history.
Well, maybe serious academic historians will still know the truth, but popular culture history will not. And popular culture history is unequivocally the history everybody is concerned with being on the right side of.
@Horace said in Chauvin shivved:
@Horace said in Chauvin shivved:
The cost in life, limb, and property incurred by this particular poetic truth would be bad enough. But I fear that, in the aftermath, when the embers have cooled and Chauvin’s name has been forgotten by everyone save his family, the true danger of the poetic truth of George Floyd will come to fruition. It will be written in books alongside uncontroversial facts, treated with the passive acceptance of any other historical occurrence, and absorbed into the storehouse of common knowledge that binds us as a culture. The deep epistemic corruption at the heart of the affair will become, if it goes unchallenged, imperceptible to future generations, simply more evidence that the world is as the poetic truth has determined it to be.
This well captures the insidiousness of the "right side of history" folks. The implication of the term is that one is sacrificing current reputation to speak a truth that will be vindicated from a future perspective, as virtuous. But in fact, they are speaking a socially advantageous falsehood, which will be viewed by historians in the future as truth, because they are writing the falsehood into history.
Well, maybe serious academic historians will still know the truth, but popular culture history will not. And popular culture history is unequivocally the history everybody is concerned with being on the right side of.
What wonderfully well written and intelligent bull shit!
Relating the Brown and Floyd cases is a nonsequitur and plays into the hands of those that want to use the “poetic truth” of the Brown case to justify all of the violence and destruction that occurred from the riots. If you believe in law and order, you cannot lump them in a category. Instead, each and every incident has to be weighed on its merit. Otherwise you grant legitimacy to those that use aggregate numbers instead of individual facts to come to their conclusions,
Michael Brown was a violent criminal that left the officer no choice but to kill him to defend his own life.
Floyd was a violent criminal that was violently killed after having been subdued and incapacitated. Using one to justify the other plays into the hands of those that want to paint all police as murders and racist.
You’re pro law and order? Then condemn Chauvin in the harshest possible manner. He deserves it. And by not doing so, you lend credence to the poetic truth that Brown was a victim.
-
@Horace said in Chauvin shivved:
@Horace said in Chauvin shivved:
The cost in life, limb, and property incurred by this particular poetic truth would be bad enough. But I fear that, in the aftermath, when the embers have cooled and Chauvin’s name has been forgotten by everyone save his family, the true danger of the poetic truth of George Floyd will come to fruition. It will be written in books alongside uncontroversial facts, treated with the passive acceptance of any other historical occurrence, and absorbed into the storehouse of common knowledge that binds us as a culture. The deep epistemic corruption at the heart of the affair will become, if it goes unchallenged, imperceptible to future generations, simply more evidence that the world is as the poetic truth has determined it to be.
This well captures the insidiousness of the "right side of history" folks. The implication of the term is that one is sacrificing current reputation to speak a truth that will be vindicated from a future perspective, as virtuous. But in fact, they are speaking a socially advantageous falsehood, which will be viewed by historians in the future as truth, because they are writing the falsehood into history.
Well, maybe serious academic historians will still know the truth, but popular culture history will not. And popular culture history is unequivocally the history everybody is concerned with being on the right side of.
What wonderfully well written and intelligent bull shit!
Relating the Brown and Floyd cases is a nonsequitur and plays into the hands of those that want to use the “poetic truth” of the Brown case to justify all of the violence and destruction that occurred from the riots. If you believe in law and order, you cannot lump them in a category. Instead, each and every incident has to be weighed on its merit. Otherwise you grant legitimacy to those that use aggregate numbers instead of individual facts to come to their conclusions,
Michael Brown was a violent criminal that left the officer no choice but to kill him to defend his own life.
Floyd was a violent criminal that was violently killed after having been subdued and incapacitated. Using one to justify the other plays into the hands of those that want to paint all police as murders and racist.
You’re pro law and order? Then condemn Chauvin in the harshest possible manner. He deserves it. And by not doing so, you lend credence to the poetic truth that Brown was a victim.
@LuFins-Dad said in Chauvin shivved:
@Horace said in Chauvin shivved:
@Horace said in Chauvin shivved:
The cost in life, limb, and property incurred by this particular poetic truth would be bad enough. But I fear that, in the aftermath, when the embers have cooled and Chauvin’s name has been forgotten by everyone save his family, the true danger of the poetic truth of George Floyd will come to fruition. It will be written in books alongside uncontroversial facts, treated with the passive acceptance of any other historical occurrence, and absorbed into the storehouse of common knowledge that binds us as a culture. The deep epistemic corruption at the heart of the affair will become, if it goes unchallenged, imperceptible to future generations, simply more evidence that the world is as the poetic truth has determined it to be.
This well captures the insidiousness of the "right side of history" folks. The implication of the term is that one is sacrificing current reputation to speak a truth that will be vindicated from a future perspective, as virtuous. But in fact, they are speaking a socially advantageous falsehood, which will be viewed by historians in the future as truth, because they are writing the falsehood into history.
Well, maybe serious academic historians will still know the truth, but popular culture history will not. And popular culture history is unequivocally the history everybody is concerned with being on the right side of.
What wonderfully well written and intelligent bull shit!
Relating the Brown and Floyd cases is a nonsequitur and plays into the hands of those that want to use the “poetic truth” of the Brown case to justify all of the violence and destruction that occurred from the riots. If you believe in law and order, you cannot lump them in a category. Instead, each and every incident has to be weighed on its merit. Otherwise you grant legitimacy to those that use aggregate numbers instead of individual facts to come to their conclusions,
Michael Brown was a violent criminal that left the officer no choice but to kill him to defend his own life.
Floyd was a violent criminal that was violently killed after having been subdued and incapacitated. Using one to justify the other plays into the hands of those that want to paint all police as murders and racist.
You’re pro law and order? Then condemn Chauvin in the harshest possible manner. He deserves it. And by not doing so, you lend credence to the poetic truth that Brown was a victim.
That all hinges on Chauvin having acted far outside the bounds of acceptable behavior. When in fact, nothing that occurred that day would have given anybody pause, but for the fact that Floyd died. After having ingested a bunch of pills of meth and opiates in order to avoid getting caught with them. There's a reasonable chance he would have died in the back of the squad car, if he'd allowed himself to be put back there. Which he forcibly did not allow.
Education is extremely important.
-
Unconscious and handcuffed would count.
@LuFins-Dad said in Chauvin shivved:
Unconscious and handcuffed would count.
State prisoners are not considered fully restrained until they are handcuffed, leg shackled, belted and chained from the leg shackles to the locking belt and handcuffs chained to the locking belt. Usually one guard, sometimes two.
Federal prisoners are similar, although I've seen vests, instead of belts. Always two guards, sometimes three.
Either way, when unchaining a prisoner, the guard in closest proximity hands his duty weapon (loaded) to another guard, or in the case of just one guard, we'd have to call for a second guard.
That is fully restrained.
Guy in handcuffs? Pfft. Seen a prisoner in handcuffs cold cock a deputy. Pissed the deputy off. He shot him.
-
@LuFins-Dad said in Chauvin shivved:
@Horace said in Chauvin shivved:
@Horace said in Chauvin shivved:
The cost in life, limb, and property incurred by this particular poetic truth would be bad enough. But I fear that, in the aftermath, when the embers have cooled and Chauvin’s name has been forgotten by everyone save his family, the true danger of the poetic truth of George Floyd will come to fruition. It will be written in books alongside uncontroversial facts, treated with the passive acceptance of any other historical occurrence, and absorbed into the storehouse of common knowledge that binds us as a culture. The deep epistemic corruption at the heart of the affair will become, if it goes unchallenged, imperceptible to future generations, simply more evidence that the world is as the poetic truth has determined it to be.
This well captures the insidiousness of the "right side of history" folks. The implication of the term is that one is sacrificing current reputation to speak a truth that will be vindicated from a future perspective, as virtuous. But in fact, they are speaking a socially advantageous falsehood, which will be viewed by historians in the future as truth, because they are writing the falsehood into history.
Well, maybe serious academic historians will still know the truth, but popular culture history will not. And popular culture history is unequivocally the history everybody is concerned with being on the right side of.
What wonderfully well written and intelligent bull shit!
Relating the Brown and Floyd cases is a nonsequitur and plays into the hands of those that want to use the “poetic truth” of the Brown case to justify all of the violence and destruction that occurred from the riots. If you believe in law and order, you cannot lump them in a category. Instead, each and every incident has to be weighed on its merit. Otherwise you grant legitimacy to those that use aggregate numbers instead of individual facts to come to their conclusions,
Michael Brown was a violent criminal that left the officer no choice but to kill him to defend his own life.
Floyd was a violent criminal that was violently killed after having been subdued and incapacitated. Using one to justify the other plays into the hands of those that want to paint all police as murders and racist.
You’re pro law and order? Then condemn Chauvin in the harshest possible manner. He deserves it. And by not doing so, you lend credence to the poetic truth that Brown was a victim.
That all hinges on Chauvin having acted far outside the bounds of acceptable behavior. When in fact, nothing that occurred that day would have given anybody pause, but for the fact that Floyd died. After having ingested a bunch of pills of meth and opiates in order to avoid getting caught with them. There's a reasonable chance he would have died in the back of the squad car, if he'd allowed himself to be put back there. Which he forcibly did not allow.
@Horace said in Chauvin shivved:
@LuFins-Dad said in Chauvin shivved:
@Horace said in Chauvin shivved:
@Horace said in Chauvin shivved:
The cost in life, limb, and property incurred by this particular poetic truth would be bad enough. But I fear that, in the aftermath, when the embers have cooled and Chauvin’s name has been forgotten by everyone save his family, the true danger of the poetic truth of George Floyd will come to fruition. It will be written in books alongside uncontroversial facts, treated with the passive acceptance of any other historical occurrence, and absorbed into the storehouse of common knowledge that binds us as a culture. The deep epistemic corruption at the heart of the affair will become, if it goes unchallenged, imperceptible to future generations, simply more evidence that the world is as the poetic truth has determined it to be.
This well captures the insidiousness of the "right side of history" folks. The implication of the term is that one is sacrificing current reputation to speak a truth that will be vindicated from a future perspective, as virtuous. But in fact, they are speaking a socially advantageous falsehood, which will be viewed by historians in the future as truth, because they are writing the falsehood into history.
Well, maybe serious academic historians will still know the truth, but popular culture history will not. And popular culture history is unequivocally the history everybody is concerned with being on the right side of.
What wonderfully well written and intelligent bull shit!
Relating the Brown and Floyd cases is a nonsequitur and plays into the hands of those that want to use the “poetic truth” of the Brown case to justify all of the violence and destruction that occurred from the riots. If you believe in law and order, you cannot lump them in a category. Instead, each and every incident has to be weighed on its merit. Otherwise you grant legitimacy to those that use aggregate numbers instead of individual facts to come to their conclusions,
Michael Brown was a violent criminal that left the officer no choice but to kill him to defend his own life.
Floyd was a violent criminal that was violently killed after having been subdued and incapacitated. Using one to justify the other plays into the hands of those that want to paint all police as murders and racist.
You’re pro law and order? Then condemn Chauvin in the harshest possible manner. He deserves it. And by not doing so, you lend credence to the poetic truth that Brown was a victim.
That all hinges on Chauvin having acted far outside the bounds of acceptable behavior. When in fact, nothing that occurred that day would have given anybody pause, but for the fact that Floyd died. After having ingested a bunch of pills of meth and opiates in order to avoid getting caught with them. There's a reasonable chance he would have died in the back of the squad car, if he'd allowed himself to be put back there. Which he forcibly did not allow.
You’re kind of skipping past the whole part where a guy kept crying that he couldn’t breathe then had a 200lb man keep his knee pressed against his trachea for 9 fucking minutes after the guy was unconscious, despite numerous pleas from the subordinate officers on the scene to call an ambulance.
There’s a chance that Floyd would have died if they had immediately called an ambulance and released pressure immediately after Floyd was unconscious. And there would be no cause for recriminations.
There is zero chance that Floyd could survive after 9 minutes of unconsciousness with his throat compressed by a 200lb man. None. The man was unconscious. Every minute that Chauvin kept his knee on his throat and didn’t call the ambulance renders all the fentanyl , opioids, and meth irrelevant.
-
@Horace said in Chauvin shivved:
@LuFins-Dad said in Chauvin shivved:
@Horace said in Chauvin shivved:
@Horace said in Chauvin shivved:
The cost in life, limb, and property incurred by this particular poetic truth would be bad enough. But I fear that, in the aftermath, when the embers have cooled and Chauvin’s name has been forgotten by everyone save his family, the true danger of the poetic truth of George Floyd will come to fruition. It will be written in books alongside uncontroversial facts, treated with the passive acceptance of any other historical occurrence, and absorbed into the storehouse of common knowledge that binds us as a culture. The deep epistemic corruption at the heart of the affair will become, if it goes unchallenged, imperceptible to future generations, simply more evidence that the world is as the poetic truth has determined it to be.
This well captures the insidiousness of the "right side of history" folks. The implication of the term is that one is sacrificing current reputation to speak a truth that will be vindicated from a future perspective, as virtuous. But in fact, they are speaking a socially advantageous falsehood, which will be viewed by historians in the future as truth, because they are writing the falsehood into history.
Well, maybe serious academic historians will still know the truth, but popular culture history will not. And popular culture history is unequivocally the history everybody is concerned with being on the right side of.
What wonderfully well written and intelligent bull shit!
Relating the Brown and Floyd cases is a nonsequitur and plays into the hands of those that want to use the “poetic truth” of the Brown case to justify all of the violence and destruction that occurred from the riots. If you believe in law and order, you cannot lump them in a category. Instead, each and every incident has to be weighed on its merit. Otherwise you grant legitimacy to those that use aggregate numbers instead of individual facts to come to their conclusions,
Michael Brown was a violent criminal that left the officer no choice but to kill him to defend his own life.
Floyd was a violent criminal that was violently killed after having been subdued and incapacitated. Using one to justify the other plays into the hands of those that want to paint all police as murders and racist.
You’re pro law and order? Then condemn Chauvin in the harshest possible manner. He deserves it. And by not doing so, you lend credence to the poetic truth that Brown was a victim.
That all hinges on Chauvin having acted far outside the bounds of acceptable behavior. When in fact, nothing that occurred that day would have given anybody pause, but for the fact that Floyd died. After having ingested a bunch of pills of meth and opiates in order to avoid getting caught with them. There's a reasonable chance he would have died in the back of the squad car, if he'd allowed himself to be put back there. Which he forcibly did not allow.
You’re kind of skipping past the whole part where a guy kept crying that he couldn’t breathe then had a 200lb man keep his knee pressed against his trachea for 9 fucking minutes after the guy was unconscious, despite numerous pleas from the subordinate officers on the scene to call an ambulance.
There’s a chance that Floyd would have died if they had immediately called an ambulance and released pressure immediately after Floyd was unconscious. And there would be no cause for recriminations.
There is zero chance that Floyd could survive after 9 minutes of unconsciousness with his throat compressed by a 200lb man. None. The man was unconscious. Every minute that Chauvin kept his knee on his throat and didn’t call the ambulance renders all the fentanyl , opioids, and meth irrelevant.
@LuFins-Dad said in Chauvin shivved:
@Horace said in Chauvin shivved:
@LuFins-Dad said in Chauvin shivved:
@Horace said in Chauvin shivved:
@Horace said in Chauvin shivved:
The cost in life, limb, and property incurred by this particular poetic truth would be bad enough. But I fear that, in the aftermath, when the embers have cooled and Chauvin’s name has been forgotten by everyone save his family, the true danger of the poetic truth of George Floyd will come to fruition. It will be written in books alongside uncontroversial facts, treated with the passive acceptance of any other historical occurrence, and absorbed into the storehouse of common knowledge that binds us as a culture. The deep epistemic corruption at the heart of the affair will become, if it goes unchallenged, imperceptible to future generations, simply more evidence that the world is as the poetic truth has determined it to be.
This well captures the insidiousness of the "right side of history" folks. The implication of the term is that one is sacrificing current reputation to speak a truth that will be vindicated from a future perspective, as virtuous. But in fact, they are speaking a socially advantageous falsehood, which will be viewed by historians in the future as truth, because they are writing the falsehood into history.
Well, maybe serious academic historians will still know the truth, but popular culture history will not. And popular culture history is unequivocally the history everybody is concerned with being on the right side of.
What wonderfully well written and intelligent bull shit!
Relating the Brown and Floyd cases is a nonsequitur and plays into the hands of those that want to use the “poetic truth” of the Brown case to justify all of the violence and destruction that occurred from the riots. If you believe in law and order, you cannot lump them in a category. Instead, each and every incident has to be weighed on its merit. Otherwise you grant legitimacy to those that use aggregate numbers instead of individual facts to come to their conclusions,
Michael Brown was a violent criminal that left the officer no choice but to kill him to defend his own life.
Floyd was a violent criminal that was violently killed after having been subdued and incapacitated. Using one to justify the other plays into the hands of those that want to paint all police as murders and racist.
You’re pro law and order? Then condemn Chauvin in the harshest possible manner. He deserves it. And by not doing so, you lend credence to the poetic truth that Brown was a victim.
That all hinges on Chauvin having acted far outside the bounds of acceptable behavior. When in fact, nothing that occurred that day would have given anybody pause, but for the fact that Floyd died. After having ingested a bunch of pills of meth and opiates in order to avoid getting caught with them. There's a reasonable chance he would have died in the back of the squad car, if he'd allowed himself to be put back there. Which he forcibly did not allow.
You’re kind of skipping past the whole part where a guy kept crying that he couldn’t breathe then had a 200lb man keep his knee pressed against his trachea for 9 fucking minutes after the guy was unconscious, despite numerous pleas from the subordinate officers on the scene to call an ambulance.
He had been screaming and crying about lots of different things, including not being able to breathe, from the moment police contacted him.
There’s a chance that Floyd would have died if they had immediately called an ambulance and released pressure immediately after Floyd was unconscious. And there would be no cause for recriminations.
They called an EMT 30 seconds after Floyd was put on the ground. But there were mixups with that and they arrived later than they should have.
There is zero chance that Floyd could survive after 9 minutes of unconsciousness with his throat compressed by a 200lb man. None. The man was unconscious. Every minute that Chauvin kept his knee on his throat and didn’t call the ambulance renders all the fentanyl , opioids, and meth irrelevant.
The throat compression by a knee is not fact, that's your framing and the framing everybody is supposed to parrot. MRT (Maximal Restraint Technique) is in the police manual and it involves kneeling on the upper back of a suspect. It's in Chauvin's training manual. His pose was similar to that picture.
I suppose there’s a chance everything in the documentary is fake. But for the sake of discussion I’m assuming it’s all legit.
-
For the sake of argument, what’s the excuse for maintaining that position after the perp is clearly unconscious?
-
For the sake of argument, what’s the excuse for maintaining that position after the perp is clearly unconscious?
@LuFins-Dad said in Chauvin shivved:
For the sake of argument, what’s the excuse for maintaining that position after the perp is clearly unconscious?
If he wasn't compressing the windpipe, but rather kneeling on his upper back, and doing so until the EMTs arrived, then I'm not sure I can get too outraged about his behavior, given the behavior of Floyd leading up to the necessity of the restraint.
-
A clearly unconscious man, in handcuffs, surrounded by how many police?
-
A clearly unconscious man, in handcuffs, surrounded by how many police?
@LuFins-Dad said in Chauvin shivved:
A clearly unconscious man, in handcuffs, surrounded by how many police?
It was unnecessary after some point. Maybe a compelling legal case can be made that it was murder 2, by the book. The framing that Floyd was suffocated for 9 minutes does not appear to be factual.
-
Most of the time during the 9 minutes Floyd is talking and trying to squirm away. Did Derek apply the correct angle of pressure? I don’t know. I know Floyd was much bigger/stronger than any of the officers and I know he resisted arrest, would not stay in the squad car, and said he couldn’t breath while no one was touching him, so I can see why Derek (hands in pockets) thought his position holding Floyd down, despite the common pleas from criminals that they can’t breathe, was somewhat routine.
-
Hard to judge this in retrospect without the lens of BLM but I don’t see murder here at all. Perhaps a lesser charge, perhaps inevitably because of drugs, perhaps just a firing, who knows… I do know that he wouldn’t have been found guilty of murder had Floyd’s melanin levels been lower (aka a white person).
