The Dereck Chauvin trial (16 Viewers)

Joined
Nov 10, 2018
Messages
1,460
Reaction score
2,655
Age
57
Location
Carriere Ms
Offline
Sticky Post
I don’t have much to say about this but if you heard the testimony of some of the prosecutions witnesses today and didn’t have a tear in your eye you aren’t human. Yes the man had a criminal record, yes the man had drugs in his body but he didn’t deserve to die like that. Could the drugs have killed him???? Maybe. Did he have other health conditions that could’ve killed him???? Maybe. But that cop took those decisions into his on hands and brought about an outrage in this country that’s been at the surface for a long time. God it’s time we turn to you.
 

saintmdterps

If we give ya the boogie, can ya handle it?
VIP Subscribing Member
Gold VIP Contributor
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
16,701
Reaction score
18,863
Age
60
Location
Salisbury, Maryland
Offline
So, why hasn't it been solved yet Tom? That's like attempting to solve rape without addressing misogyny with the basis being well men are sexually assaulted and raped too. We are ALL victims. Not equally my friend. Law enforcement has an abuse of power and subverting rights issue but one demographic disproportionately experiences those issues more than others. Undeniably. How can possibly have police reform without resolving their white supremacy problem and how can you possibly address white supremacy without addressing race?

Lost in a history you don't understand.
Read the history of Reconstruction post-Civil War and you see the direct ties to today. For many, the post-war attitudes have not changed, they were just subordinated. Southern police during Reconstruction wore Confederate gray uniforms. The symbolism was not lost on the Black population.

To many whites, blacks are inferior and don't deserve to be treated as equals. It's as simple and sad as that.

Lost in a history we many times do not understand is a good way to put it. To understand where we are, we need to look at where we came from. For many of us whites, that's a degree of introspection we simply are not willing to engage in because it explodes the "self-made man" myth. Many successful white males are the product of a society that was set up to enable their success at the expense of pretty much every other demographic in the country.

We needed the Civil Rights Act in 1964 to even begin to right the ship. That's not ancient history, it's current events. Some say we've come along way in race relations. I beg to differ. Recent events highlight the ongoing race issues in this country but now social media makes it difficult to simply sweep these incidents under the rug.

My roommate at University of Maryland was black. Derak and I would talk about race, and he said "You'll never know what it's like to go into a department store and have the clerk follow you the entire time because he or she thinks you'll steal something. They have no idea, My parents would kill me" These words rang true, but I got a much more graphic demonstration of race relations. In the spring of 1981 Derak's parents came to campus to take him to dinner. Since I was there, they asked me to go as well. Eager to duck dining hall food, I gratefully accepted. We went to a local restaurant and stood in the foyer waiting to be seated. Derak's parents in front with Derak and me standing behind. The hostess walked right around his parents, looked beyond Derak, and asked how many were in my party. I was appalled. I said "You need to ask these nice folks, I'm with them" Then said "We can leave if you want" "Nope, we're eating here" Derak's dad said.

Derak looked at me and shrugged. In that gesture was 350 years of Black American history. That shrug said "Now you get it" I certainly did. 350 years of being shown how little you matter, and indeed you're invisible.

That was 1981 in College Park, Maryland. Not the Jim Crow south. The extent to which these attitudes still prevail is sickening.
 
Last edited:

bigdaddysaints

BigDaddy Has Arrived
VIP Contributor
Joined
Jan 3, 2006
Messages
7,649
Reaction score
11,617
Age
47
Location
DutchTown
Online
True , even though my opinion was the same as Saintman2884 , I get hammered and he gets hindsight , thanks friend .
that's because he wasn't speaking in absolutes and blaming EVERY SINGLE bystander of doing.NOTHING. maybe you forgot you said those things? also the fact you said you wouldn't resort to physical, but wouldn't answer what the alternative would be other than physical interruption. but I'm sure you still won't.
That is why you get "hammered" and he didn't.
 

guidomerkinsrules

W H A T E V I R
VIP Contributor
Joined
Apr 30, 2007
Messages
62,887
Reaction score
104,432
Location
by the cemeteries
Online
For some who are saying policing is biased. I don’t buy it. I guarantee you I shake in my boots just the same as everyone the moment I see a cop. I go the other way. I stay at home. I don’t go out late at night. I stay away from them. That is fact.
Sentences 3-7 might be facts
But they don’t prove sentence 1
 

sfidc3

Pro-Bowler
Joined
Mar 14, 2015
Messages
3,795
Reaction score
4,580
Offline
This is where I am confused if you're saying you agree....

you're saying that people fail to realize that intervening with cops may NOT turn out to be a disaster for all involved.

99% of the time, messing with cops in the line of duty is going to end up bad for EVERYONE involved trying to obstruct them from carrying out their responsibilities (even if what they are doing is later to be found as an abuse of power).
Ah, yes....Dave is correct, I should not have included....not....

I suspect the not part was inadvertently inserted there.
 

Optimus Prime

Subscribing Member
VIP Subscribing Member
VIP Contributor
Joined
Jul 18, 1998
Messages
8,427
Reaction score
9,206
Offline
Powerful comments from Dr. Cornell West on Don Lemon last night





Full video here

 
Last edited:

Optimus Prime

Subscribing Member
VIP Subscribing Member
VIP Contributor
Joined
Jul 18, 1998
Messages
8,427
Reaction score
9,206
Offline
Evidence presented this week in Derek Chauvin’s trial on charges that he murdered George Floyd showed a national audience how the former Minneapolis police officer saw his alleged victim: as a dangerous, “sizable” Black man who had to be controlled, subdued and forced to submit. The message Chauvin sent with his actions wasn’t intended for Floyd alone, and it’s one Black Americans have heard for centuries.

Chauvin didn’t see Floyd as a citizen suspected of a minor, nonviolent crime or as the gentle “mama’s boy” Floyd’s girlfriend, Courteney Ross, described. To Chauvin and the other officers, Floyd was guilty from the start — guilty of inhabiting an imposing Black male body, a circumstance that has always been a punishable offense in this country.
As witness Charles McMillian tried to tell Floyd when the officers first put their hands on him: “You can’t win.”

For me, McMillian’s Wednesday testimony was the most heartbreaking so far — and, sadly, the least surprising. At 61, he has lived long enough to know all about the criminalization of Black manhood. He cried on the witness stand as he described feeling “helpless” while Floyd — pinned to the ground, with Chauvin’s knee on his neck — cried out for his late mother. “I don’t have a mama either,” McMillian said. “I understand him.”

After the May 25, 2020, encounter was over, and Floyd’s limp and apparently lifeless body had been taken away by paramedics, McMillian is heard on bystander video bravely confronting Chauvin about his actions. Chauvin’s response says everything about the lens through which he saw Floyd: “We’ve got to control this guy because he’s a sizable guy. Looks like he’s probably on something.”

Think about the fact that Chauvin and the other officers thought they had to “control” Floyd in the first place. And think about how they initiated their encounter with him..........

Opinion | Black Americans all got Derek Chauvin’s message. Loud and clear. - The Washington Post
 

Big_L

Team Big Pimpin'
Joined
Apr 11, 2005
Messages
8,399
Reaction score
8,272
Age
48
Location
Pimpin Purgatory
Online
Let me spell this out for you I guess.

Police accountability can be implemented without addressing racism.
Racism in police should be addressed also.
These 2 things can happen exclusively of one another.
Police accountability discussions have stalled because all the focus is on race.
I work in a police department. I have stayed out of this so far due to the fact that I have my issues with police management. I will say this, accountability is most definitely tied in to racism. I have seen white officers not even get a verbal counseling for issues that myself and other black officers have faced termination over (calling another officer lazy, etc). I don't think most cops are racist, however one can observe the racial . . . undertones when dealing with suspects of different races under similar circumstances. If racial disparities are addressed, accountability for each officer will go up. A lot of problems will be settled. It's almost as if being a racist piece of work emboldens individuals and they descend down that slippery slope into being something so perverse, it's hard to comprehend how they were even hired in the first place.
 

Dago

Veteran
Joined
Jan 10, 2007
Messages
7,063
Reaction score
10,950
Offline
Yeah, I haven't much of the trial, but if he's shown to treat others differently like that, I can't see how the jury would mistake this for anything other than willfully killing Floyd.
That doesn't mean it was willfull killing. It does show intentional mistreatment and the death was a result of that intentional mistreatment. It's a fine line, but I don't like to try to play mind reader.

Either way, the verdict is the same IMO
 

Saintman2884

Hall-of-Famer
Joined
Dec 17, 2003
Messages
14,681
Reaction score
2,472
Offline
Do you fear for your life upon being pulled over by a police officer?
If I'm a drug mule, human or sex trafficker, a devious, long-time secret paedophile who drives around spying on, propositioning underage minors and some undercover vice cops start following you and gathering evidence to one morning break down your front door to arrest you or pull you over to arrest you ala for sex crimes, pedophilia, corruption of minors, possession of child pornography, you may not be killed or necessarily be afraid your life will end once you've been arrested, but figuratively and literally from a legal perspective, your life is over and considering how even hardcore criminals feel and act towards pedophiles, sex offenders and child abusers, by the time they reach general population in a federal Supermax, it might be a death sentence.

Never underestimate the grim meaning behind this prison mantra: Sex offenders and pedophiles are the pariahs of the prison yard.
 

tomwaits

Frontier Psychiatrist
Joined
Aug 1, 2002
Messages
16,333
Reaction score
6,219
Age
45
Location
Pflugerville, TX
Online
I work in a police department. I have stayed out of this so far due to the fact that I have my issues with police management. I will say this, accountability is most definitely tied in to racism. I have seen white officers not even get a verbal counseling for issues that myself and other black officers have faced termination over (calling another officer lazy, etc). I don't think most cops are racist, however one can observe the racial . . . undertones when dealing with suspects of different races under similar circumstances. If racial disparities are addressed, accountability for each officer will go up. A lot of problems will be settled. It's almost as if being a racist piece of work emboldens individuals and they descend down that slippery slope into being something so perverse, it's hard to comprehend how they were even hired in the first place.
So I am saying the current system for accountability is crap.
You saying that racism is a problem in the current system is not an argument against scrapping the current accountability system for a better one, its an argument for scrapping the current system.
 

DaveXA

I love the Lord!
Staff member
Super Moderator
Joined
Sep 6, 2001
Messages
35,677
Reaction score
23,751
Age
50
Location
Vienna, VA via Lafayette
Offline
So I am saying the current system for accountability is crap.
You saying that racism is a problem in the current system is not an argument against scrapping the current accountability system for a better one, its an argument for scrapping the current system.
I don't think anyone is saying the current system for accountability isn't crap. They're say a large reason for crap accountability is driven by racism. And you can't expect to scrap the current system without dealing with the problem of racism. They go hand in hand. An overhaul of accountability without dealing with racism still leaves us with a broken accountability system.
 

DaveXA

I love the Lord!
Staff member
Super Moderator
Joined
Sep 6, 2001
Messages
35,677
Reaction score
23,751
Age
50
Location
Vienna, VA via Lafayette
Offline
Well, the police chief made some remarks that made it pretty much impossible for the cops involved to claim they followed what they were trained to do. From everything I've seen and heard so far, I'd be surprised if the jury took very long to hand down a verdict.
 

Optimus Prime

Subscribing Member
VIP Subscribing Member
VIP Contributor
Joined
Jul 18, 1998
Messages
8,427
Reaction score
9,206
Offline
Well, the police chief made some remarks that made it pretty much impossible for the cops involved to claim they followed what they were trained to do. From everything I've seen and heard so far, I'd be surprised if the jury took very long to hand down a verdict.
I had read that even before George Floyd plenty of people in Minneapolis would dispute that the police had "the core value of treating everyone with "dignity and respect."

But it's good that the chief gave this testimony. It looking more and more that a guilty verdict is certain
=======================================================

Minneapolis Police Chief Medaria Arradondo on Monday thoroughly rejected Derek Chauvin's actions during the arrest of George Floyd last May as contrary to department policy.

"Once Mr. Floyd had stopped resisting, and certainly once he was in distress and trying to verbalize that, that should have stopped," Arradondo testified during Chauvin's criminal trial.

"There is an initial reasonableness in trying to get him under control in the first few seconds," Arradondo said. "But once there was no longer any resistance and clearly when Mr. Floyd was no longer responsive and even motionless, to continue to apply that level of force to a person proned out, handcuffed behind their back -- that in no way shape or form is anything that is by policy. It is not part of our training, and it is certainly not part of our ethics or our values."

In particular, the chief said Chauvin's kneeling on Floyd's neck for nine minutes and 29 seconds is not a trained tactic and was a violation of the policies around de-escalation, objectively reasonable use of force and requirement to render aid.

"That action is not de-escalation, and when we talk about the framework of our sanctity of life and when we talk about the principles and values we have, that action goes contrary to what we're talking about," he said................

George Floyd: Police chief says Derek Chauvin's actions were 'in no way, shape or form' proper policy (msn.com)
 

Optimus Prime

Subscribing Member
VIP Subscribing Member
VIP Contributor
Joined
Jul 18, 1998
Messages
8,427
Reaction score
9,206
Offline
The defense is asking a lot of questions about drugs and Floyd's health

What difference does that make?

Even if Floyd did have a weakened heart due to drug use and a perfectly healthy man would have survived the knee to the neck it was still the stress/panic/trauma of the knee to the neck that triggered his death.

What would that change?

Wouldn't we still be here at this same trial with the same charges?
 
Last edited:

St. Widge

Socially Distant
VIP Contributor
Joined
Mar 14, 2002
Messages
37,749
Reaction score
21,614
Age
49
Location
4th Ward Soldier
Online
The defense is asking a lot of questions about drugs and Floyd's health

What difference does that make?

Even if Floyd did have a weakened heart due to drug use and a perfectly healthy man would have survived the knee to the neck it was still the stress/panic/trauma of the knee to the neck that triggered his death.

What would that change?

Wouldn't we still be here at this trial with the same charges?
I mean, it's probably going to be hard to prove actual intent to kill in this case. So, they are probably going to have to go with either reckless indifference or negligent homicide. So, the defense may intend to argue that it wasn't his intent to kill, it's just that because Floyd had heart issues what would not have killed most, ended up killing him. They could also argue that it wasn't negligent because Floyd only died because of a bad heart and since he did not know about it and had no reason to know about it, he was not negligent. I don't think either argument holds water when you hold your knee on a man's neck for 15 minutes, including while he is not even moving, but that may be what they are thinking of trying to argue.

(I'm not sure what the exact charge is, but even if they charge him higher, he likely could be convicted of a lower included offense like negligent homicide. Not sure if Minnesota law allows that, but LA law does.)

Edit: Here are the charges: https://www.startribune.com/derek-c...ghter-police-minneapolis-minnesota/600030691/

What is second-degree unintentional murder?
For a conviction of second-degree unintentional murder, the state's prosecutors will have to show beyond a reasonable doubt that Chauvin caused Floyd's death while assaulting him.

What is third-degree murder?
Initially, Chauvin faced an additional charge of third-degree murder, but Cahill dismissed that charge and denied a request from the prosecution to reinstate it. The Minnesota Court of Appeals ruled Friday that the judge was wrong to refuse reinstating the third-degree murder charge and sent the case back to Cahill for consideration. After the Minnesota Supreme Court declined to consider an appeal from the defense, Cahill reinstated the charge Thursday. It also carries a presumptive sentence in this case of 10 3⁄4 years to 15 years, according to state sentencing guidelines.

Third-degree murder requires prosecutors to prove that someone caused the death of another "by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life." Legal experts note that the definition of "depraved mind" is murky— as is the legal line between "depraved mind" and the "culpable negligence" standard for manslaughter.

What is second-degree manslaughter?
In order to convict Chauvin of second-degree manslaughter, prosecutors will need to show beyond a reasonable doubt that he was "culpably negligent" and took an "unreasonable risk" with Floyd's life when he restrained him and that his actions put Floyd at risk of death or great harm. Prosecutors do not have to prove that Chauvin's actions intended to cause Floyd's death, only that his actions put Floyd at risk of death or great bodily harm.

So, none of these require proof of "intent." But Second Degree Unintentional Murder requires proof that Cauvin's actions caused Floyd's death. So the argument would be that his death was caused by the heart condition, not the assault.

Third-degree murder requires prosecutors to prove that someone caused the death of another "by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life." So, the argument is that the act wasn't "eminently" dangerous because it would not have been dangerous but for his heart.
 
Last edited:

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 10, Guests: 6)

 

New Orleans Saints Twitter Feed

 

Headlines

Top Bottom