|
Post by LFC on Apr 9, 2021 15:39:30 GMT
Derek Chauvin is on trial for the murder of George Floyd. The defense is trying to blame his death on drugs and a heart condition, not the fact that he was handcuffed, on the ground, and strangled. An expert witness testified that it was like losing a lung. In what is a good sign multiple police officials and members have testified that what Chauvin did was contrary to his training and department policy.
The defense is taking a beating. Of course it is a trial of a police officer and they don't have a good track record of outcomes for the victims.
I still don't get the defense. If I hit a defensive lineman as hard as I can I doubt it would do much damage. If I punch a tiny 90-yr old woman in a walker I would likely hurt her badly and could possibly kill her. Does that mean it's her fault for being small, frail, and old?
|
|
|
Post by goldenvalley on Apr 9, 2021 15:51:16 GMT
I still don't get the defense. If I hit a defensive lineman as hard as I can I doubt it would do much damage. If I punch a tiny 90-yr old woman in a walker I would likely hurt her badly and could possibly kill her. Does that mean it's her fault for being small, frail, and old?
They're looking for a hung jury. Or a jury that will acquit because they weren't at the scene, weren't the cop, and so will give the cop the benefit of the doubt when it comes to the handling of a disrespectful, drug using black man.
|
|
|
Post by goldenvalley on Apr 12, 2021 16:19:48 GMT
From Minneapolis: The Minneapolis police force can't get out of its own way. You'd think the powers that be would be telling their people not to shoot people, no matter how provoked, during this trial. The powers that be did a lot to distance the police force from bad cop behavior with testimony over the last week and now this.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2021 16:39:25 GMT
I still don't get the defense. If I hit a defensive lineman as hard as I can I doubt it would do much damage. If I punch a tiny 90-yr old woman in a walker I would likely hurt her badly and could possibly kill her. Does that mean it's her fault for being small, frail, and old?
Yeah, if one member of the jury believes it sufficiently. Why do you fantasize hitting people? What's going on? Also, remember, it's permissible only to hit Ted Cruz. Figuratively, of course.
|
|
|
Post by LFC on Apr 12, 2021 20:56:37 GMT
Why do you fantasize hitting people? What's going on? It's an offshoot of sharing the road with idiots. "Why yes, I would like to shove that cellphone down your throat because you nearly hit me."
|
|
|
Post by LFC on Apr 12, 2021 21:42:58 GMT
The Minneapolis police force can't get out of its own way. You'd think the powers that be would be telling their people not to shoot people, no matter how provoked, during this trial. The powers that be did a lot to distance the police force from bad cop behavior with testimony over the last week and now this. This seems to be like a truly unintentional f***-up in the heat of the moment but because of the PD's track record it will likely turn into a bigger shitstorm. The taser sounds like it was warranted. Clearly gunning the man down was not. But with bodycam footage we at least have an indication that the officer really did intend to use a taser.
|
|
|
Post by goldenvalley on Apr 12, 2021 22:29:11 GMT
This seems to be like a truly unintentional f***-up in the heat of the moment but because of the PD's track record it will likely turn into a bigger shitstorm. The taser sounds like it was warranted. Clearly gunning the man down was not. But with bodycam footage we at least have an indication that the officer really did intend to use a taser. Yeah I made my comment before the tasing thing was revealed. I see the alleged mistake and it makes more sense to me. Though it makes me wonder why the taser and the revolver are so close together on the cop's belt that it's easy to grab the wrong one.
|
|
|
Post by Bact PhD on Apr 13, 2021 0:44:24 GMT
This seems to be like a truly unintentional f***-up in the heat of the moment but because of the PD's track record it will likely turn into a bigger shitstorm. The taser sounds like it was warranted. Clearly gunning the man down was not. But with bodycam footage we at least have an indication that the officer really did intend to use a taser. Yeah I made my comment before the tasing thing was revealed. I see the alleged mistake and it makes more sense to me. Though it makes me wonder why the taser and the revolver are so close together on the cop's belt that it's easy to grab the wrong one. So close together on the belt...and a bit too close in “feel,” perhaps. In that sort of a moment, I don’t know how difficult it is to distinguish one from the other.
|
|
|
Post by LFC on Apr 13, 2021 15:08:14 GMT
Yeah I made my comment before the tasing thing was revealed. I see the alleged mistake and it makes more sense to me. Though it makes me wonder why the taser and the revolver are so close together on the cop's belt that it's easy to grab the wrong one.
Wait, were they? I thought they were actually on opposite sides which made this a particularly big f***-up.
|
|
|
Post by goldenvalley on Apr 13, 2021 15:21:04 GMT
Yeah I made my comment before the tasing thing was revealed. I see the alleged mistake and it makes more sense to me. Though it makes me wonder why the taser and the revolver are so close together on the cop's belt that it's easy to grab the wrong one. So close together on the belt...and a bit too close in “feel,” perhaps. In that sort of a moment, I don’t know how difficult it is to distinguish one from the other. I thought I heard the police chief in the case say that the Taser was actually on the opposite side of the body from the firearm but I can't find a print report that says that. Here's a discussion of Tasers and confusion. I just don't understand how a traffic stop can lead to this. What's so important about an expired registration or air fresheners hanging from the rearview mirror? In my part of the world running stop lights, an actual danger to other vehicles, is handled by cameras at the intersections. The ticket is mailed to the wrongdoer. Not as dramatic as pulling someone over so the officer can look tough and menacing as they advance on the vehicle and confront the driver.
|
|
|
Post by LFC on Apr 13, 2021 16:03:55 GMT
I just don't understand how a traffic stop can lead to this. What's so important about an expired registration or air fresheners hanging from the rearview mirror? This is a LONG standing police technique. In the early 90s we lived near a local officer. He said they pulled people over all the time late at night for small infractions to try to find drunk drivers. He said it worked better than traffic stops. I've also read police saying if you follow somebody long enough they're bound to cross a line on the road or do something else trivial that can be used an excuse to pull them over. Or they can just lie and say you were driving "suspiciously."
|
|
|
Post by LFC on Apr 13, 2021 16:19:55 GMT
Anybody trying to explain away these actions must first explain these words by the officer. Good luck with that.
|
|
|
Post by goldenvalley on Apr 13, 2021 16:21:25 GMT
Kid #1, female, college student, got pulled over at 1 AM driving to her apartment from a friend's place. The pretext, the little light bulb that illuminates the rear license plate was out. She was beyond nervous...late in the night, alone with a male police officer hulking at the car door. She wasn't drinking or high. She was 20 at the time and was designated driver for her friends that night. He chastised her for not changing her drivers license address to her apartment. Our home address was on it. Didn't write a ticket for the light bulb. I guess he had fun making her scared.
|
|
|
Post by LFC on Apr 13, 2021 16:26:46 GMT
Dumbest ticket I ever got was when an officer, probably trying to make quota, pulled me over and wrote me up for the little plastic rim the dealers put around the license plate with their name on it. There's apparently a law that says that obstructs the license plate. (The number and state were clearly still visible.) It was a NJ shore town in winter. I guess ticket revenues are low outside of tourist season and I had a PA plate. I paid the $40 rather than take a day off and driving 2+ hours to a court date.
|
|
|
Post by LFC on Apr 13, 2021 17:53:29 GMT
|
|
|
Post by goldenvalley on Apr 13, 2021 18:47:04 GMT
Saved them the trouble of firing her. Of course it won't head off any civil lawsuits for her or the department.
|
|
andydp
Tenured Full Professor
Posts: 3,010
|
Post by andydp on Apr 13, 2021 18:57:27 GMT
Dumbest ticket I ever got was when an officer, probably trying to make quota, pulled me over and wrote me up for the little plastic rim the dealers put around the license plate with their name on it. There's apparently a law that says that obstructs the license plate. (The number and state were clearly still visible.) It was a NJ shore town in winter. I guess ticket revenues are low outside of tourist season and I had a PA plate. I paid the $40 rather than take a day off and driving 2+ hours to a court date. Didn't get a ticket, but after eight years of driving without a front plate on the Corvette I was pulled over in town. I wasn't speeding, everything was good. As background, I can't tell you how many checkpoints, stops, safety checks etc I went through with that car and not one officer or Trooper said anything about a missing front plate. That is until a State Police Lieutenant pulls me over. Starts asking if I know why he pulled me over. I said I had absolutely no idea. He kept asking and I kept repeating I had no idea. Finally reveals he stopped me for no front plate. I said its in back, I took it off at the car wash and forgot. Asked him if I could get out and put it on. End of problem. Didn't write me up or give me a warning. For the record: I forgot to put it back on last week too.
|
|
|
Post by Bact PhD on Apr 13, 2021 21:23:27 GMT
Kid #1, female, college student, got pulled over at 1 AM driving to her apartment from a friend's place. The pretext, the little light bulb that illuminates the rear license plate was out. She was beyond nervous...late in the night, alone with a male police officer hulking at the car door. She wasn't drinking or high. She was 20 at the time and was designated driver for her friends that night. He chastised her for not changing her drivers license address to her apartment. Our home address was on it. Didn't write a ticket for the light bulb. I guess he had fun making her scared. Twenty-plus years ago, when Chem PhD and I were dating (and Dear Daughter was probably about 3, she was definitely still in a car seat), the three of us were coming back from the beach (a 2-hour drive) on a Saturday night. I was driving. Dear Daughter had been puking for the last hour or so of the drive, and all I wanted to do was get back to my apartment, get her cleaned up and down for the night, and me down for the night. We're on the home stretch...very little traffic...one more gauntlet of traffic signals, including my turn-off, and it was a wrap. I'm doing 37 in a 35, and I see the cruiser pull out. Shit...but no flashers so far. Three lights... Two lights (still right behind me)... The light where I make my turn-off (Finally!). There's one car stopped, me,...and the cop (still no lights, no nothing). One cycle of the light runs through, but no green turn arrow. Two cycles, same thing. After the third cycle without a turn arrow, both the driver in front of me and I said "To hell with this!" and went through the red light in the absence of any traffic. You know what happened next. The lights. Shit! Officer Friendly went to the driver in front of me (who turned out to also be female) first. I guess she (like I) claimed the light was broken, because when he came to me, after taking my license and looking at it, (and I forget the exact wording) used words to the effect that we both still should have sat there until it turned green (yeah, right!). Anyhoo, only a verbal warning...maybe the kid puke turned him off.
|
|
|
Post by LFC on Apr 13, 2021 21:24:42 GMT
We know the inaccuracy of facial recognition technology, especially for blacks, and Detroit PD used it as the sole reason to improperly hold a man in jail for 30 hours. This is what happens when you're drive to get a suspect, any suspect, rather than to ensure you've got the right suspect.
It gets worse. This is flat out criminal on the part of the arresting officers.
|
|
|
Post by goldenvalley on Apr 13, 2021 22:43:37 GMT
Gee you can't even face your accuser when the accuser is facial recognition technology.
|
|
AnBr
Associate Professor
Posts: 1,819
|
Post by AnBr on Apr 14, 2021 13:01:05 GMT
|
|
|
Post by LFC on Apr 14, 2021 19:13:23 GMT
He sounds like a Republican justifying voter suppression laws. "I have no evidence and there are much more plausible scenarios but this could have happened and that's why I'm convinced it did happen." Crackpot.
|
|
|
Post by LFC on Apr 15, 2021 16:05:16 GMT
|
|
|
Post by goldenvalley on Apr 15, 2021 16:13:23 GMT
Why would he do that? The defense could just rest without calling him, at least in my state that's true. The defense rested after saying that holding the guy prone was not a use of force and that the victim actually died of heart disease. It's as if the app. 9 minutes holding him down didn't even happen.
|
|
|
Post by LFC on Apr 15, 2021 19:28:47 GMT
|
|