George Floyd incident with Derek Chauvin, not guilty IMO

[Use of Time]

Your chances of recovering from your current medical crisis are drastically reduced when you are prevented from receiving proper aid.

 

[Wingman68]

Your chances of recovering from your current medical crisis are drastically reduced when you are prevented from receiving proper aid.

Salty said: ↑
Call me what you want - just dont call me late for supper!
We just going to let slurs like “wetback” stand? You want to make jokes?

This board is an embarrassment and I no longer wish to be associated with it.

Good luck in your walk everyone. Parting advice. Live your life more and obsess over scoring points on the never ending partisan scoreboard less. You’ll find you are wasting your life away nitpicking every little thing that is inconsequential in the long run.

#71Use of Time, Jan 20, 2021

Well that didn’t take long.........at least when others have made their parting slam on the rest of us, they didn’t lie.

 

[Reformed1689]

Except that the officer took responsibility for the man as soon as he removed the man's ability to act. That is where the officer can be said to have contributed to his death (the "what it's come into play....what if medical personnel were called the first time Floyd complained of not being able to breathe.. things like that).

I don't think "what ifs" belong in a court of law.

 

[JonC]

I don't think "what ifs" belong in a court of law.

Yoy are wrong. The "what ifs" are ALWAYS in a court of law when dealing with negligence. The questions are "what if". The criminals (here the officer's) actions are considered in the context as if they did not happen or as if they occurred differently (like doing one's job and getting g a man medical attention instead of kneeling on his neck).

It has always been that way, at least in the US court system.

What if the guard took the shoelaces as was his duty? What if the gun was stored properly? What if the mechanic did the checks as required?

That is why the officer is responsible - probably not 1st degree murder but at least homicide. He took responsibility and was legally responsible for the man's life. He neglected his duty and the man died.

 

[Reformed1689]

Yoy are wrong. The "what ifs" are ALWAYS in a court of law when dealing with negligence. The questions are "what if". The criminals (here the officer's) actions are considered in the context as if they did not happen or as if they occurred differently (like doing one's job and getting g a man medical attention instead of kneeling on his neck).

It has always been that way, at least in the US court system.

What if the guard took the shoelaces as was his duty? What if the gun was stored properly? What if the mechanic did the checks as required?

That is why the officer is responsible - probably not 1st degree murder but at least homicide. He took responsibility and was legally responsible for the man's life. He neglected his duty and the man died.

And I am saying that is a stretch. You cannot prove that he would not have died if the what if had occurred. That's an unfair process if that is truly allowed. Now, if you want to charge him with wreckless endangerment or neglect of some kind that is one thing, but homicide? No.

 

[canadyjd]

IMO, Floyd murdered himself.
you cant live with such a lifestyle as he had very long.

His “lifestyle” is irrelevant. Mr. Floyd was in custody. The police were responsible for his care. They did not act reasonably. They did not follow their training. At the very least, they contributed to his death and, quite frankly, a good argument can be made they caused his death by staying on top of him knowing he had no discernible pulse.

peace to you

 

[canadyjd]

Wrong. Or should I say, dead wrong?

Only if you want to demonstrate to everyone you have no class.

peace to you

 

[Reformed1689]

His “lifestyle” is irrelevant. Mr. Floyd was in custody. The police were responsible for his care. They did not act reasonably. They did not follow their training. At the very least, they contributed to his death and, quite frankly, a good argument can be made they caused his death by staying on top of him knowing he had no discernible pulse.

peace to you

No, the autopsy is clear the overdose was the cause of death.

 

[canadyjd]

No, the autopsy is clear the overdose was the cause of death.

And the defense will make that case over and over.

And the prosecution will show that video of the officer smirking while kneeling on his neck for 7 minutes with Mr. Floyd begging for his life and then for 2:45 seconds while Mr. Floyd is unconscious, unresponsive and with no discernible pulse and ask “why?” He will say the officer wanted Mr.Floyd dead.

And the jurors will be moved to tears with compassion for Mr. Floyd and absolute loathing for the officer.

And the only thing that will matter is those 2:45 seconds that ended Mr.Floyd’s life.

peace to you

 

[Reformed1689]

He will say the officer wanted Mr.Floyd dead.

And the jurors will be moved to tears with compassion for Mr. Floyd and absolute loathing for the officer.

And the defense should rightfully object due to speculation and the judge should instruct the jury to ignore the statement.

 

[JonC]

And I am saying that is a stretch. You cannot prove that he would not have died if the what if had occurred. That's an unfair process if that is truly allowed. Now, if you want to charge him with wreckless endangerment or neglect of some kind that is one thing, but homicide? No.

Negligent homicide would be appropriate (the officers neglect contributed to the man's death by depriving the man of medical assistance).

 

[Scott Downey]

I looked up negligent homicide, another name is manslaughter, maybe 3rd degree murder, however a first or second murder charge against police here is not appropriate, as it involves killing someone with evil intentions, as in malice aforethought, as in before they meet. So consider a police officer shooting to death someone racing towards them in a car after a long chase, does the cop have a malice aforethought towards the guy? quite possibly could, but no one would charge cop with murder. How about restraining someone on the ground, cop could be angry at the criminal, and pin him hard, but not with murderous intentions, the encounter was not planned ahead of time, how can that be proved, what the cop was thinking, like thinking about murdering the guy?

Negligent Homicide - Definition, Examples, Cases, Processes (legaldictionary.net)
Murder
Murder is the unjustified killing of another person with malice aforethought. This means that the defendant took someone’s life with intention or premeditation. Many state laws include two categories of murder: first-degree and second-degree. In many states,

• First-degree murders involve premeditation or the use of explosives. It is also first-degree if a defendant killed a person knowing they were a police officer, correctional officer, or judge.
• Second-degree murders lack premeditation. In other words, the defendant did not plan on committing the act of murder. Conduct that demonstrates an extreme indifference to human life and results in death also classifies as second-degree murder.

 

[Revmitchell]

I watched all the videos - there were four from different angles and places.

As much as I love and revere the police force, this particular policeman murdered George Floyd. Not premeditated....but with a total and reckless disregard for human life.

I know that will not make me popular here at the BB, but it is what I saw.

I've listened to people say that it didn't matter one whit because Floyd was a criminal, a drug user, and "resisting" arrest. That's very sad to me.

I have people in my family who have done the same as Floyd and if they were treated as he was - you would know me on the news. I would not stop until something was done. The couple of relatives I speak of are in prison and they need to be there, but they were arrested and tried properly.

This was really, really bad.

As former leo I cam say that what chauvin did was contrary to use of force and the law. The question remains is did floyd die as a result of that action or did he die as a result of something else. You are saying you know that he died as a result of chauvins illegal actions. My question for you is what evidence have you seen to support that?

 

[canadyjd]

I looked up negligent homicide, another name is manslaughter, maybe 3rd degree murder, however a first or second murder charge against police here is not appropriate, as it involves killing someone with evil intentions, as in malice aforethought, as in before they meet. So consider a police officer shooting to death someone racing towards them in a car after a long chase, does the cop have a malice aforethought towards the guy? quite possibly could, but no one would charge cop with murder. How about restraining someone on the ground, cop could be angry at the criminal, and pin him hard, but not with murderous intentions, the encounter was not planned ahead of time, how can that be proved, what the cop was thinking, like thinking about murdering the guy?

Negligent Homicide - Definition, Examples, Cases, Processes (legaldictionary.net)
Murder
Murder is the unjustified killing of another person with malice aforethought. This means that the defendant took someone’s life with intention or premeditation. Many state laws include two categories of murder: first-degree and second-degree. In many states,

• First-degree murders involve premeditation or the use of explosives. It is also first-degree if a defendant killed a person knowing they were a police officer, correctional officer, or judge.
• Second-degree murders lack premeditation. In other words, the defendant did not plan on committing the act of murder. Conduct that demonstrates an extreme indifference to human life and results in death also classifies as second-degree murder.

Knowing Mr.Floyd had no discernible pulse the officer kept his knee on his neck for another 2:45 seconds. Why? It is reasonable to conclude the officer wanted Mr.Floyd to die.

Had he spent that 2:45 seconds doing CPR, there would be no case.

peace to you

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

Only if you want to demonstrate to everyone you have no class.

LOL. The point would be that someone venturing out on a limb to hang the jury by refusing to condemn could be “committing suicide” by Progressive Leftist mob.

Your claim that it couldn’t happen in this case may be easy to make from an armchair, but is a foolish thing to believe in real life, and hardly the sort of class one should want to learn from. The lesson may end not only abruptly but permanently.

 

[Aaron]

This is factually untrue as proven by the autopsy report.

Truth doesn't matter. Only feelings.

 

[canadyjd]

And the defense should rightfully object due to speculation and the judge should instruct the jury to ignore the statement.

A reasonable person could conclude the reason the officer stayed on Mr. Floyd’s neck for 2:45 seconds after being informed he had no detectable pulse was because the officer intended for him to die.

peace to you

 

[canadyjd]

Truth doesn't matter. Only feelings.

The prosecution and defense stoke emotions when it suits them, regardless of the evidence.

peace to you

 

[Aaron]

Mr. Floyd was handcuffed, in custody, on his face on the ground repeatedly begging for his life. After the officer was told Mr. Floyd was unconscious, unresponsive and had no discernible pulse, he remained on his neck for another 2:45 seconds.

That is far more than “foolish, unnecessary and lacking empathy.”

That 2:45 seconds is the only thing that will matter in this trial.

peace to you

career criminals always cry about the way they're treated.

 

[canadyjd]

LOL. The point would be that someone venturing out on a limb to hang the jury by refusing to condemn could be “committing suicide” by Progressive Leftist mob.

Your claim that it couldn’t happen in this case may be easy to make from an armchair, but is a foolish thing to believe in real life, and hardly the sort of class one should want to learn from. The lesson may end not only abruptly but permanently.

No doubt the jurors will have extraordinary pressure from all sides, not the least of which will be consider consequences for an acquittal.

Fortunately for them, the evidence of guilt is overwhelming.

peace to you