Chauvin verdict

[ordnance]

Quote

Chauvin messed up , he got it wrong , and George Floyd lost his life ,  but , if George Floyd had have been compliant,  things would never have gone that far . I'm not saying that he deserved to be killed  , but he could have vastly improved his situation if he had just done as he was politely asked to do by the police officer. 

I would put it a bit more than messed up, not complying with police is not good reason or justification for them to use excessive force.  

[Rewulf]

40 minutes ago, ordnance said:

I would put it a bit more than messed up, not complying with police is not good reason or justification for them to use excessive force.  

Really ? 

Does that mean they cant use differing levels of force depending on the situation of non compliance ?
Have you ever tried to put hand cuffs on someone twice your weight , who really would rather you didnt ?

When you are placed under arrest you comply with the officers instructions, or they will make you comply.
If you resist arrest, then YOU have escalated the situation , and committed a crime in itself.
The justification for further force would be something YOU have instigated.

All Floyd had to do was get in the back of a police car, whatever he had done was hardly a reason for worry about consequences.
He complained of claustrophobia , yet was arrested (at gunpoint) inside his own car, that he was about to drive off in (off his head)

Not one person here has attempted to justify why the Timpa case is different to the Floyd case, or indeed to the Eric Garner case, save for the fact that Timpa was white ?

[ordnance]

Quote

Does that mean they cant use differing levels of force depending on the situation of non compliance ?
Have you ever tried to put hand cuffs on someone twice your weight , who really would rather you didnt ?

He was already in handcuffs and restrained, when on the ground not breathing with a knee on his neck. Just resisting does not give the police authority to use whatever force they want, police have to decide what is reasonable force in the situation and justify the level of force used. He got it wrong and is paying the price, as it should be. 

[Rewulf]

31 minutes ago, ordnance said:

Just resisting does not give the police authority to use whatever force they want

It does.. within reason, proportional to the situation...

32 minutes ago, ordnance said:

police have to decide what is reasonable force in the situation and justify the level of force used

There you go , you agree with me, justification in this case was the fact that Floyd is freaking huge ! Plus obviously off his rocker.

33 minutes ago, ordnance said:

He got it wrong and is paying the price, as it should be. 

Agreed....But , do you think he deserves 40 years for it, is it anything approaching murder ?
Its a clear case of manslaughter, unfortunately , this was not going to satisfy the BLM mob.

When a trial outcome is based on the possible lawless reaction from the mob , which is  outside of the scope of evidence, how can it be a fair trial ?
Like wise , if various political entities are declaring 'only a guilty verdict will suffice' how can that trial not be halted immediately ?

[chrisjpainter]

38 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

It does.. within reason, proportional to the situation...

There you go , you agree with me, justification in this case was the fact that Floyd is freaking huge ! Plus obviously off his rocker.

Agreed....But , do you think he deserves 40 years for it, is it anything approaching murder ?
Its a clear case of manslaughter, unfortunately , this was not going to satisfy the BLM mob.

When a trial outcome is based on the possible lawless reaction from the mob , which is  outside of the scope of evidence, how can it be a fair trial ?
Like wise , if various political entities are declaring 'only a guilty verdict will suffice' how can that trial not be halted immediately ?

In the UK, yes. But there are specific criteria which take what Chauvin did beyond that under the US system, as I put earlier. There was obscene recklessness in his actions, with minimal if any mitigating factors. So whilst there might have been no premeditation to kill him, the recklessness of the action, the disregard for procedure (as senior police officers testified to and accused him of) and lack of restraint in those actions make a strong case to say he should be at the very least charged with something more than manslaughter if the law allows, which is what second and third degree murder charges are for. 

The strength of the evidence presented has got very little to do with a lawless mob. Were the body cameras part of a lawless mob? Was the medical science part of a lawless mob? Were the cops who testified against Chauvin part of a lawless mob? The media circus might have got carried away with the eye witness testimonies, but what sealed Chauvin's fate was the scientific and video evidence the Defence couldn't refute. 

[henry d]

14 hours ago, Wintel73 said:

Not withstanding Floyd's criminal history, he was visibly high on drugs = criminal, he resisted arrest = criminal, (guilt on the fraud would have had to be determined in court) but his actions in the run up to his death were manifestly criminal, and the police had no choice to detain him and keep him subdued for everyone else’s safety given the state he was in. Including he was trying about to drive off in a car while clearly seriously impaired... no way letting him drive off like that could go wrong ehh...?

First things first, turning up to that job you would have no idea what kind of intoxicant he had taken, or even if he was diabetic and going hypo, again innocent until proven guilty and no matter what the officers are there to serve and protect everyone involved. You don't turn up with your assumptions unless you have a racist mindset as in this case.

In all the videos I have seen he is resisting arrest and is quickly cuffed, he doesn't want to get in and is forced into the car and this is where Chauvin's real nature shows, instead of pulling him to the safe side, the pavement, he pulls him through the car to the traffic side which I would suggest was to try to avoid people seeing him kneel on his neck. It would have been easier to exit the pavement side, less chance of him falling on his head, he was cuffed and could not save himself, so all in all Chauvin has no one to blame apart from himself, he could have done the right thing and he would have gone home and had a good career and Floyd would have probably gone to jail.

[clangerman]

all these sour grapes and still nobody has volunteered to have someone kneel on THIER neck for nine mins can’t think what the reluctance is maybe they don’t fancy brain damage or dying to prove a point 

[Rewulf]

51 minutes ago, chrisjpainter said:

There was obscene recklessness in his actions

This is the part I consider to be inaccurate , if he was like this in all of his arrests , its likely his police career would have been extremely short lived?
He used the force he deemed necessary at the time, as I would imagine most cops do.

56 minutes ago, chrisjpainter said:

the disregard for procedure (as senior police officers testified to and accused him of)

So no other officers use that procedure ?
Sounds like a blatant bottom covering statement.

57 minutes ago, chrisjpainter said:

The strength of the evidence presented has got very little to do with a lawless mob.

Thats not what I was trying to say.
The lawless mob would have been unleashed, as we all know, IF ANY OTHER VERDICT than guilty was announced.
We could surmise from that 100 % real eventuality, that the evidence was immaterial.
If you were the judiciary, what would you do  ?
If you were the jurors ?
Can you not see there could be ONLY a guilty verdict, and not to a lesser charge, they wanted murder 1 at one point, and asked for the sentencing restriction of 40 years to be lifted on murder 2 , as 40 years wasnt enough !
 

53 minutes ago, henry d said:

First things first, turning up to that job you would have no idea what kind of intoxicant he had taken, or even if he was diabetic and going hypo, again innocent until proven guilty and no matter what the officers are there to serve and protect everyone involved.

You also have a duty to protect yourself and colleagues.
And lets be quite clear. innocent until proven guilty plays NO part in an arrest, arrest means exactly what it says, you are incapacitated under the law, be that controlled , bound, or kneeled on.
Further attempts at resisting arrest , escalate to physical violence, chemical sprays, tasering , or indeed being shot with a firearm.

58 minutes ago, henry d said:

unless you have a racist mindset as in this case.

Its funny how this racist mindset doesnt get mentioned in the court, or in Chauvins Asian wife ?
You WANT to believe there was a racist element, because that confirms YOUR mindset.

1 hour ago, henry d said:

In all the videos I have seen he is resisting arrest and is quickly cuffed, he doesn't want to get in and is forced into the car and this is where Chauvin's real nature shows, instead of pulling him to the safe side, the pavement, he pulls him through the car to the traffic side which I would suggest was to try to avoid people seeing him kneel on his neck. It would have been easier to exit the pavement side, less chance of him falling on his head, he was cuffed and could not save himself, so all in all Chauvin has no one to blame apart from himself, he could have done the right thing and he would have gone home and had a good career and Floyd would have probably gone to jail.

Or Floyd could have just got in the car, and maybe everyone could have gone home? 19 people wouldnt have died in rioting, and business's up and down the country would not have been destroyed.
Plus all the other disruption , social division , and the weaponisation of one mans accidental death to foment a race war ?

But no , better to blame it all on one cop, whose 20 year service, stopping criminals like Floyd from hurting others is cast aside, as we try to make him the personification of a racist, who deliberately set out to kill a black man that day ?
Why do you always take the side of the criminal ?

Its a strange twisted logic.

1 hour ago, clangerman said:

all these sour grapes and still nobody has volunteered to have someone kneel on THIER neck for nine mins can’t think what the reluctance is maybe they don’t fancy brain damage or dying to prove a point 

And what point would it prove, no one suggested it was a great thing to do .

Have you ever been arrested , did they treat you with kid gloves and make you a nice cup of tea ?

[clangerman]

18 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

This is the part I consider to be inaccurate , if he was like this in all of his arrests , its likely his police career would have been extremely short lived?
He used the force he deemed necessary at the time, as I would imagine most cops do.

So no other officers use that procedure ?
Sounds like a blatant bottom covering statement.

Thats not what I was trying to say.
The lawless mob would have been unleashed, as we all know, IF ANY OTHER VERDICT than guilty was announced.
We could surmise from that 100 % real eventuality, that the evidence was immaterial.
If you were the judiciary, what would you do  ?
If you were the jurors ?
Can you not see there could be ONLY a guilty verdict, and not to a lesser charge, they wanted murder 1 at one point, and asked for the sentencing restriction of 40 years to be lifted on murder 2 , as 40 years wasnt enough !
 

You also have a duty to protect yourself and colleagues.
And lets be quite clear. innocent until proven guilty plays NO part in an arrest, arrest means exactly what it says, you are incapacitated under the law, be that controlled , bound, or kneeled on.
Further attempts at resisting arrest , escalate to physical violence, chemical sprays, tasering , or indeed being shot with a firearm.

Its funny how this racist mindset doesnt get mentioned in the court, or in Chauvins Asian wife ?
You WANT to believe there was a racist element, because that confirms YOUR mindset.

Or Floyd could have just got in the car, and maybe everyone could have gone home? 19 people wouldnt have died in rioting, and business's up and down the country would not have been destroyed.
Plus all the other disruption , social division , and the weaponisation of one mans accidental death to foment a race war ?

But no , better to blame it all on one cop, whose 20 year service, stopping criminals like Floyd from hurting others is cast aside, as we try to make him the personification of a racist, who deliberately set out to kill a black man that day ?
Why do you always take the side of the criminal ?

Its a strange twisted logic.

And what point would it prove, no one suggested it was a great thing to do .

Have you ever been arrested , did they treat you with kid gloves and make you a nice cup of tea ?

prove they are making excuses for a bully having restrained plenty of idiots I would have no problem inflicting serious damage kneeling on someone’s neck same as one said with floyds past he would always end up like this with chauvins past HE was always going to end up injuring someone got exactly what he deserved 

[ordnance]

Quote

There you go , you agree with me, justification in this case was the fact that Floyd is freaking huge ! Plus obviously off his rocker.

I do not agree with you, he was already on the ground restrained and in handcuffs. He had no justification to keep him there with his knee on has neck.  

Quote

 

Or Floyd could have just got in the car, and maybe everyone could have gone home? 19 people wouldnt have died in rioting, and business's up and down the country would not have been destroyed.
Plus all the other disruption , social division , and the weaponisation of one mans accidental death to foment a race war ?

But no , better to blame it all on one cop, whose 20 year service, stopping criminals like Floyd from hurting others is cast aside, as we try to make him the personification of a racist, who deliberately set out to kill a black man that day ?
Why do you always take the side of the criminal ?

Its a strange twisted logic.

 

You are taking the side of a convicted murderer, disagreeing with the officers actions is not taking the side of the criminal, its wanting people including police to be accountable for their actions. 

Edited April 24, 2021 by ordnance

[Mungler]

Forget for one moment who is actually under the knee - forget whether man or woman, black or white, convicted criminal or suspect and just remember that person had their hands cuffed behind their back and said ‘I can’t breathe’ about 50 times before being asphyxiated. Indeed, set an egg timer for 10 minutes and have a ponder. 

I’m no fan of scumbag wasters but stuff like this is just not on.
 

[Rewulf]

1 hour ago, Mungler said:

no fan of scumbag wasters but stuff like this is just not on

Tony Timpa wasnt a scumbag waster, hadnt committed a crime ,called police himself because he was scared and mentally I'll.

Timpa was white though , so no one to riot and protest for him.

That wasnt on either , but all cops (who laughed at him as he died) exonerated of any wrong doing, and still in their jobs.

1 hour ago, ordnance said:

ou are taking the side of a convicted murderer, disagreeing with the officers actions is not taking the side of the criminal, its wanting people including police to be accountable for their actions

I think you need to read what I actually said. 

[ordnance]

32 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Tony Timpa wasnt a scumbag waster, hadnt committed a crime ,called police himself because he was scared and mentally I'll.

Timpa was white though , so no one to riot and protest for him.

That wasnt on either , but all cops (who laughed at him as he died) exonerated of any wrong doing, and still in their jobs.

I think you need to read what I actually said. 

I did. 

Edited April 24, 2021 by ordnance

[12gauge82]

5 hours ago, henry d said:

First things first, turning up to that job you would have no idea what kind of intoxicant he had taken, or even if he was diabetic and going hypo, again innocent until proven guilty and no matter what the officers are there to serve and protect everyone involved. You don't turn up with your assumptions unless you have a racist mindset as in this case.

In all the videos I have seen he is resisting arrest and is quickly cuffed, he doesn't want to get in and is forced into the car and this is where Chauvin's real nature shows, instead of pulling him to the safe side, the pavement, he pulls him through the car to the traffic side which I would suggest was to try to avoid people seeing him kneel on his neck. It would have been easier to exit the pavement side, less chance of him falling on his head, he was cuffed and could not save himself, so all in all Chauvin has no one to blame apart from himself, he could have done the right thing and he would have gone home and had a good career and Floyd would have probably gone to jail.

Please explain to me what racism has to do with this case. I know we seem to have polar opposite view points on most things but since this whole thing kicked off I just can't see any racial element. 

[JohnfromUK]

On 23/04/2021 at 14:57, TIGHTCHOKE said:

to be hero worshipped is complete madness!

On R4 this morning (in the 'god squad' hour) there was an interview with a Pastor who claimed he knew George Floyd well.  he painted a picture of a lovely family man who 'was like a big teddy bear' and wouldn't hurt a fly.

Now in the type of community where Floyd lived - I can see the local community believing the Pastor - who they no doubt see as 'one of them' rather than the Police ......... and when we have a situation like that - how can the truth prevail?

[henry d]

42 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

On R4 this morning (in the 'god squad' hour) there was an interview with a Pastor who claimed he knew George Floyd well.  he painted a picture of a lovely family man who 'was like a big teddy bear' and wouldn't hurt a fly.

Now in the type of community where Floyd lived - I can see the local community believing the Pastor - who they no doubt see as 'one of them' rather than the Police ......... and when we have a situation like that - how can the truth prevail?

There are a few things in what you are saying here; you say "I can see..." and then finish with "... how can truth prevail?" You have unintentionally put your bias of how you think the community think, I am fairly sure plenty of those people in the community thought of him as a criminal through stories about him or directly from contact with him. Any pastor, or secular/humanist society celebrant, will for the sake of the family use the good things about a person rather than the bad, I imagine many people have wondered who the minister was talking about at a funeral. I sure was at my mother's!

[ordnance]

1 hour ago, JohnfromUK said:

On R4 this morning (in the 'god squad' hour) there was an interview with a Pastor who claimed he knew George Floyd well.  he painted a picture of a lovely family man who 'was like a big teddy bear' and wouldn't hurt a fly.

Now in the type of community where Floyd lived - I can see the local community believing the Pastor - who they no doubt see as 'one of them' rather than the Police ......... and when we have a situation like that - how can the truth prevail?

I think Floyds past good or bad is irrelevant to what happened, the officers actions were wrong no matter who's neck his knee was on.   

[JohnfromUK]

13 minutes ago, henry d said:

There are a few things in what you are saying here; you say "I can see..." and then finish with "... how can truth prevail?

Perhaps I am old fashioned but (despite being pretty much non religious myself) the local clergyman, and indeed in the vast majority of cases, most 'religious leaders' (i.e. Rabbis, clergy from other churches, Imans, and similar) were regarded with great respect and being 'pillars of the community'.  For example - in the past when a list of people able to vouch for you on a SGC application, passport application etc., the Clergy/religious leaders were up there with the Doctors, Magistrates, members of the legal profession etc.  I well remember getting a local magistrate friend of my parents to validate mine.

The 'truth' will not prevail if the respected members (as above) don't speak it.

2 minutes ago, ordnance said:

I think Floyds past good or bad is irrelevant to what happened

Agreed, I was more leaning towards answering/explaining Tightchoke's point on "to be hero worshipped is complete madness!"

[henry d]

18 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

Agreed, I was more leaning towards answering/explaining Tightchoke's point on "to be hero worshipped is complete madness!"

Spot on, in both Floyd and Chauvin's case.

[12gauge82]

3 hours ago, henry d said:

There are a few things in what you are saying here; you say "I can see..." and then finish with "... how can truth prevail?" You have unintentionally put your bias of how you think the community think, I am fairly sure plenty of those people in the community thought of him as a criminal through stories about him or directly from contact with him. Any pastor, or secular/humanist society celebrant, will for the sake of the family use the good things about a person rather than the bad, I imagine many people have wondered who the minister was talking about at a funeral. I sure was at my mother's!

What about your bias being "fairly sure" what people in that community think? 

I won't hold my breath for a reply. 

[Demonic69]

On 24/04/2021 at 17:17, Mungler said:

Forget for one moment who is actually under the knee - forget whether man or woman, black or white, convicted criminal or suspect and just remember that person had their hands cuffed behind their back and said ‘I can’t breathe’ about 50 times before being asphyxiated. Indeed, set an egg timer for 10 minutes and have a ponder.
 

Don't forget that Floyd had been making excuses since the police first arrived, including being claustrophobic and not being able to breathe, even while half-in half out of the squad car. At which point does the boy crying wolf get his own way?

I agree that Chauvin should have reacted differently, but I can imagine it being hard to take every complaint at face value when being presented with excuse after excuse from every criminal you try to arrest. I'm only addressing the "I can't breathe" issue though.

[udderlyoffroad]

17 minutes ago, Demonic69 said:

At which point does the boy crying wolf get his own way?

Indeed, some armchair coppers on here seem to forget that these 'frequent fliers' with the police will say, do and claim anything if they think it'll help or delay proceedings.

It was Floyd's drug addiction and criminal behaviour that killed him.  The fact the Police Officer in this case didn't follow procedure to the point of negligance and prematurely arranged the meeting with Floyd's maker isn't acceptable, but I'm not losing any sleep over it.

What I can't believe is the amount of politicians seemingly prepared to risk a mis-trial to give the man a good kicking.  Utterly contemptible behaviour, and be under no doubt, if the same happened on this side of the pond, Chauvin would have walked free.

I still haven't seen any attempts by the media commenteriat or the usual suspects on here, to show where the trial established that race was actually a motive?

[JohnfromUK]

1 minute ago, udderlyoffroad said:

Utterly contemptible behaviour

To be fair, that is the sort of behaviour one expects from most of today's politicians.  They are not often held to account (e.g. lose their seats, pensions etc.) when they misbehave.  We have loads over here - and the only one I can think of who got punished in recent times was Onasanya.

[Dave-G]

1 hour ago, JohnfromUK said:

To be fair, that is the sort of behaviour one expects from most of today's politicians.  They are not often held to account (e.g. lose their seats, pensions etc.) when they misbehave.  We have loads over here - and the only one I can think of who got punished in recent times was Onasanya.

That might be due to most others having the intelligence to know they'd be found out and don't try to bring a trump card into play..

[12gauge82]

1 hour ago, udderlyoffroad said:

Indeed, some armchair coppers on here seem to forget that these 'frequent fliers' with the police will say, do and claim anything if they think it'll help or delay proceedings.

It was Floyd's drug addiction and criminal behaviour that killed him.  The fact the Police Officer in this case didn't follow procedure to the point of negligance and prematurely arranged the meeting with Floyd's maker isn't acceptable, but I'm not losing any sleep over it.

What I can't believe is the amount of politicians seemingly prepared to risk a mis-trial to give the man a good kicking.  Utterly contemptible behaviour, and be under no doubt, if the same happened on this side of the pond, Chauvin would have walked free.

I still haven't seen any attempts by the media commenteriat or the usual suspects on here, to show where the trial established that race was actually a motive?

On the race issue, henry seems to have inside knowledge maybe he will shed light on it. I have asked him but he's ignored me.