Posted on 05/28/2020 4:48:19 PM PDT by bort
Authorities dashed hopes that an arrest had been made over the [death of George Floyd]
.. Prosecutors have warned there is "evidence that does not support criminal charges....
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Not the way you mean it. In this case it doesn't matter if they intended to kill him. The officer with a knee on his neck intended to put his knee on his neck. It wasn't an accident. The question is whether that act was legally justified.
I said this on another thread.
I saw a pompous jerk of a Police Officer that refused to listen to imploring witnesses with the attitude of "you can't tell me what to do" and I'll kill the man just to prove I'm right.If you'll forgive me for block quoting myself. The Policeman was so intent on not giving any quarter to the bystanders and onlookers, that in the moment he did intend to kill George Floyd because no civilian rabble can tell me what to do. The way he grabbed for his pepper spray while still putting pressure on the man's neck is a tell.
I had earlier assumed he was guilty of only manslaughter until I was able to watch the complete video with sound.
https://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2020/may/george-floyd-ministry-houston-third-ward-church.html
Yea bad dude ... A Christian in youth ministry helping young people.
Simply put - I have a degree in criminal justice in the state of Texas and I know EXACTLY what I am talking about...lol
And - as I suspected - and have now researched - the cop has been charged with 3rd-degree murder - which - DRUM ROLL PLEASE - does NOT require intent.
"MN 609.195 MURDER IN THE THIRD DEGREE: Whoever, WITHOUT INTENT to effect the death of any person, causes the death of another by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life, is guilty of murder in the third degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 25 years."
Of course, I have put the WITHOUT INTENT part in all caps, bold and underline so that those who seem to want to argue stupid points - thinking they know everything, when in fact they know nothing, will get the point. If they want to look up Texas 19.04 and the legal definitions of that deal with intent - they can do that as well. Then - if they still want to come back and argue about charges STILL requiring intent - I can't help them - because you cannot fix stupid.
So there was enough evidence for multiple charges of murder after all.
You were saying?
Wouldn't it be nice if the authorities exercised the meticulous concern for all of our rights each step along the way, for us civilians, they way they bend over to do for each other?
Derek Chauvin cannot get a fair trial in Minneapolis.
Early Covid-19 there were no right or wrong answers, just information to review and to provide to others to educate and see if some could help with proving or disproving the information. So even if some information was wrong, working together to help should not bother others. It was a crazy time and we all just wanted to stay safe.
Later
Your cash is waiting at the front desk, and.. Thank you!
lol.....
There you go Grandpa Simpson. Indicted immediately, just like I said.
There you go Grandpa Simpson. Indicted immediately, just like I said.
Sorry for that extra repost after you replied. Im not sure how I did it.
Sorry for that extra repost after you replied. Im not sure how I did it.
I dont understand your point. Obviously you think that cop had every right to knee him into death. Am I right? No matter what his history thats not how America works.
Now...provide a link to the source of that long thing you posted and then Ill decide if its worthy of my precious time to read it.
G-d some of the people on this forum are disgusting.
CHAUVIN Derek, COMPLAINT
STATEMENT OF PROBABLE CAUSE (excerpt)
The defendant pulled Mr. Floyd out of the passenger side of the squad car at 8:19:38 p.m. and Mr. Floyd went to the ground face down and still handcuffed. Kueng held Mr. Floyds back and Lane held his legs. The defendant placed his left knee in the area of Mr. Floyds head and neck. Mr. Floyd said, I cant breathe multiple times and repeatedly said, Mama and please, as well. The defendant and the other two officers stayed in their positions.The officers said, You are talking fine to Mr. Floyd as he continued to move back and forth. Lane asked, should we roll him on his side? and the defendant said, No, staying put where we got him. Officer Lane said, I am worried about excited delirium or whatever. The defendant said, Thats why we have him on his stomach. None of the three officers moved from their positions.
BWC video shows Mr. Floyd continue to move and breathe. At 8:24:24, Mr. Floyd stopped moving. At 8:25:31 the video appears to show Mr. Floyd ceasing to breathe or speak. Lane said, want to roll him on his side. Kueng checked Mr. Floyds right wrist for a pulse and said, I couldnt find one. None of the officers moved from their positions.
At 8:27:24, the defendant removed his knee from Mr. Floyds neck. An ambulance and emergency medical personnel arrived, the officers placed Mr. Floyd on a gurney, and the ambulance left the scene. Mr. Floyd was pronounced dead at Hennepin County Medical Center.
The Hennepin County Medical Examiner (ME) conducted Mr. Floyds autopsy on May 26, 2020. The full report of the ME is pending but the ME has made the following preliminary findings. The autopsy revealed no physical findings that support a diagnosis of traumatic asphyxia or strangulation. Mr. Floyd had underlying health conditions including coronary artery disease and hypertensive heart disease. The combined effects of Mr. Floyd being restrained by the police, his underlying health conditions and any potential intoxicants in his system likely contributed to his death.
The defendant had his knee on Mr. Floyds neck for 8 minutes and 46 seconds in total. Two minutes and 53 seconds of this was after Mr. Floyd was non-responsive. Police are trained that this type of restraint with a subject in a prone position is inherently dangerous.
5-300 Use of Force5-301 PURPOSE (10/16/02) (08/17/07) (07/28/16)
A. Sanctity of life and the protection of the public shall be the cornerstones of the MPDs use of force policy.
B. The purpose of this chapter is to provide all sworn MPD employees with clear and consistent policies and procedures regarding the use of force while engaged in the discharge of their official duties.
(Note: MPD Training Unit Lesson Plans Use of Force, are used as a reference throughout this chapter.)
5-301.01 POLICY (10/16/02) (08/17/07)
Based on the Fourth Amendments reasonableness standard, sworn MPD employees shall only use the amount of force that is objectively reasonable in light of the facts and circumstances known to that employee at the time force is used. The force used shall be consistent with current MPD training.
[...]
5-311 USE OF NECK RESTRAINTS AND CHOKE HOLDS (10/16/02) (08/17/07) (10/01/10) (04/16/12)
DEFINITIONS I.
Choke Hold: Deadly force option. Defined as applying direct pressure on a persons trachea or airway (front of the neck), blocking or obstructing the airway (04/16/12)
Neck Restraint: Non-deadly force option. Defined as compressing one or both sides of a persons neck with an arm or leg, without applying direct pressure to the trachea or airway (front of the neck). Only sworn employees who have received training from the MPD Training Unit are authorized to use neck restraints. The MPD authorizes two types of neck restraints: Conscious Neck Restraint and Unconscious Neck Restraint. (04/16/12)
Conscious Neck Restraint: The subject is placed in a neck restraint with intent to control, and not to render the subject unconscious, by only applying light to moderate pressure. (04/16/12)
Unconscious Neck Restraint: The subject is placed in a neck restraint with the intention of rendering the person unconscious by applying adequate pressure. (04/16/12)
PROCEDURES/REGULATIONS II.
A. The Conscious Neck Restraint may be used against a subject who is actively resisting. (04/16/12)
B. The Unconscious Neck Restraint shall only be applied in the following circumstances: (04/16/12)
1. On a subject who is exhibiting active aggression, or;
2. For life saving purposes, or;
3. On a subject who is exhibiting active resistance in order to gain control of the subject; and if lesser attempts at control have been or would likely be ineffective.
C. Neck restraints shall not be used against subjects who are passively resisting as defined by policy. (04/16/12)
D. After Care Guidelines (04/16/12)
1. After a neck restraint or choke hold has been used on a subject, sworn MPD employees shall keep them under close observation until they are released to medical or other law enforcement personnel.
2. An officer who has used a neck restraint or choke hold shall inform individuals accepting custody of the subject, that the technique was used on the subject.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.