My synagogue is part of this peaceful March tomorrow for peace. Hopefully these faith healers and congregations can help to start the healing. It’s a beginning and not an end. We do a lot of work with Bright Star Church in Chicago for years with our shul.
If local. Join. https://brightstarchurchchicago.com/black-lives-matter-demonstration/
I both live and work close to where George Floyd’s murder and then its aftermath occurred. I haven’t been on CC for the last few days because I’ve been cleaning up my city and donating and organizing groceries and supplies for my neighbors who don’t have food or baby formula or diapers because all the grocery stores in the area are burned or damaged, many people don’t have cars, and public transportation is down.
Here are a few thoughts from my vantage point:
Next, read about this real pillar of society, a white guy who “came up to riot” from Illinois: https://www.startribune.com/we-came-to-riot-illinois-man-livestreamed-lighting-fires-in-minneapolis/570930722/?refresh=true (google "Matthew Lee Rubert if the link doesn’t work). The local reporters who interviewed protestors and shop owners trying to save their stores report that the most malicious damage and the fires in particular were mostly done by white folks.
Of course, there will always needs to be some kind of police force for violent crimes, etc. But think about it: most things that cops do would be much better done by someone else. They are generally terrible social workers (a huge proportion of their calls are domestic disturbances, they are the ones who have to intervene in child protection cases, etc). They are dismal mental health providers (lots of people who get killed by cops are actually having mental health crises). People issuing parking tickets don’t need to be armed. Etc, etc.
What we really need is a better safety net. And living wages and affordable housing and good schools for every kid. If we had all of those things, we’d need very few cops.
A new report from the medical examiner lists fentanyl and meth. I assume this is confirmed with the wording the way it is?
Would certainly help Chauvin’s defense.
“ Cause of death: Cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression
Manner of death: Homicide
How injury occurred: Decedent experienced a cardiopulmonary arrest while being restrained by law enforcement officer(s)
Other significant conditions: Arteriosclerotic and hypertensive heart disease; fentanyl intoxication; recent methamphetamine use”
Death by homicide still is not a good look for Chauvin’s defense.
Since toxicology usually takes weeks, I feel that the Hennepin Medical Examiner was being premature with this claim, and I am suspicious of it, especially after the independent autopsy has different results regarding cause of death.
Aside from that, what you are saying is that the Chauvin’s defense will be that the lives of people who are addicted to opioids and meth are worth less? Or that Chauvin’s defense lawyer will claim that holding addicts in lethal holds when they have not resisted or behaved violently is justified because they are addicts. Or perhaps the defense will claim that killing a sick person by putting a foot on their neck is justified because they are sick?
I truly fail to see how any of this will help the defense.
Well, I take that back. For a racist White member of a jury, the life of a Black addict is worth less than the career of a racist White police officer. Unfortunately, the USA is full of people like that.
Isn’t the old saying something like “one bad apple spoils the entire bunch”?
Indeed, one officer (or a few officers) prone to misconduct may define the image for the entire department (since people generally remember and tell others about bad experiences more than good experiences), resulting in lower trust in the police department, resulting in worse relationship with the community, resulting in worse effectiveness at doing the job.
The medical examiner has nothing to do with the “manner of death” determination. It has no legal meaning, as mentioned in part of the report I didn’t quote.
If Floyd were intoxicated, it would support Chauvin’s claim that Floyd was resisting arrest. There is a time gap in the video footage available to the public when the reported resistance could have happened. Hopefully body camera footage will fill in that gap.
Also, the maneuver Chauvin used is legal, and used when drug use is suspected.
Still haven’t seen any evidence to suggest race played a factor.
I’m not a lawyer, but this case doesn’t appear to be a slam dunk yet.
The cause of death is pretty darn self-evident in 8 1/2 minutes of excruciating video. Chauvin’s lack of response to George Floyd’s final words (“I can’t breathe”) for several minutes before he finally lets up is also pretty clear.
There’s a great meme of Goya’s ‘Third of May 1808’ (the ‘firing squad’) painting with “Cause of death: Rupture of Aorta” captioned below. Wish I could post a pic.
So my synagogue is one of the religious institutions that will be part of this peaceful March tomorrow. We do a lot of work with Bright Star Church in Chicago
It doesn’t make a difference. Kneeling on someone’s windpipe for 8 minutes with the assistance of the other 2 with one watching and doing nothing is the issue. 3rd degree now makes sense to me since they “can” get a clean conviction on that. Trying to go for 1st degree might be too tricky in this case. With all his priors I wouldn’t be surprised if they reopen some of the officers cases that were swept under the rug. Looks like the Chief of the Police should be fired soon also. It’s gonna be a house cleaning to make a difference
Who then goes home and takes prescription opioids for chronic pain and gives prescription amphetamines to the kid whose ADHD caused trouble paying attention in school…
MN state AG Keith Ellison took over the case from local prosecutors, by one opinion I read, because the local guy botched the recent press conference, and possibly to escalate charges to 2nd degree murder.
2nd degree would be a disaster for the case.
Not sure that matters. The union head mentioned in a prior post (Kroll) seems very intent on defending his people, which is probably why he was elected by the union in a landslide.
Wondering if Chauvin’s priors are even admissible in court because of how closely they are guarded in the union contracts.
Not sure if Ellison’s personal motivations can be a factor in the trial, but he has connections to antifa, which brings his objectivity into question.
Not to excuse what the officers did, but of course the 6’6" George Floyd was resisting arrest with all the strength that he could muster while possibly high on drugs at the time. There is video available on CNN showing multiple officers struggling in an unsuccessful attempt to get him into the police car.
I spoke with some (retired) police officers whom I have known for decades. They all agreed that what the officer did to Floyd was ridiculous, and should not have been done. The better way would have been to raise his handcuffed arms behind his back towards his head. This causes enough pain that the suspect lurches forward, and at that point (to avoid the unnatural extension of his arms) the suspect can then be “torpedoed” head first into the cruiser.
Another method would be to call for an ambulance, and have four officers, each controlling one extremity, strap him to a gurney. Each of these would be sanctioned techniques, techniques that officers are trained to perform on suspects who resist regardless of race.
In earlier times, a baton hit to the back of the knees would also have worked, allowing a suspect who is resisting with all his strength and stiffening up (which apparently is what Floyd was doing) to be placed into the cruiser. But, for obvious reasons, this is no longer a sanctioned technique.
The reason I go into this detail is not for lurid entertainment. Rather, it is to give some posters here some sense of just what it is like to struggle with someone 6’6" (imagine a female officer trying to do this). This doesn’t happen that often of course, but all the officers I know face something similar to this on at least a weekly basis.
Last, people make a big deal of a suspect being “unarmed.” This is nonsensical, and reflects a lack of understanding of what fights and struggles are all about (I wonder just how many fights these posters have been in). As any officer will tell you, in a close in struggle, the suspect is in fact “armed.” He (and it is almost always a he) is armed with the officer’s service weapon (this is what happened in the Michael Brown case, where it was pretty conclusively shown that he was attempting to reach the officer’s weapon). It is often a split second decision - police weapons generally do not have safeties - and the required 12lb pressure on the trigger is nothing to a grown male.
Just some food for thought out there.
@ChangeTheGame , I’ve been looking at the thread title this morning and while I was running errands earlier, I kept thinking of the final part.
The brutal murder of George Floyd has been discussed here and of course in the general media. The protests and protesters have been discussed, and demonized by some people. What hasn’t been discussed enough is the biggest part. What’s next?
What’s next? Is this murder, THIS murder the one that become the inflection point that causes Americans to do a deep study of systemic unjust treatment and abuse? Is THIS murder the one that makes Americans realize eradicating racism is not about politics, but about humanity and human decency? Is THIS murder the one that finally leads to wholesale change?
I know that some whites have always been a part of the battle for equal treatment. But I must say I am very surprised, shaken, and overjoyed to see the sheer numbers of white people (and all other races) participating in the marches of the past week. In some marches, it seems the white people nearly outnumber the black people.
Every time I see a young white woman insert herself between a young black man and the batons and firearms of law enforcement, I can’t believe change has come so far since the last possible inflection points. Again, it’s not that it is happening once or twice, but that it is happening very often in the coverage I’ve seen.
What’s next? We have to be honest. The county cannot change for the better until a majority of the country changes for the better. It cannot be only minorities that put the final click on the change. It has to be a majority, and the majority includes more than just minorities.
Seeing all these marches with a full spectrum of participation gives me a glimmer of hope that yes, THIS murder might be the inflection point for real change. Maybe not the final great change we hope for, but maybe the penultimate change that gets us to that point next time people, all people, get outraged enough to work to effect change.
I have to be honest. That’s not food for thought. Personally, it sounds like trying to excuse murder. Either the killing of George Floyd was a murder, or it was not.
For those who believe it was a murder, there is no need to bring up “possible” excuses. The video speaks for itself.
Those who don’t believe it was murder, who believe everything the killer did in that 9 minute video was justified and proper, those are the ones that might look for possible reasons to excuse the killer’s actions.
I have no problem admitting I believe the killing of George Floyd was cold blooded murder, an evil vile act committed by someone who should spend at least a couple of decades of his life in prison.
I’m not sure I’ve seen one person say it was not murder, but I’d be glad to listen to someone who thought the killing was justified and that the killer should not be convicted and imprisoned.
@EconPop - I am not excusing the officers’ actions in the George Floyd case. I thought I was pretty clear that all the police officers I spoke with agreed that their actions were “ridiculous” and you know what, I will say that they were criminal as well. I would withhold judgement as to whether it was “murder” until we see more evidence. The Michael Brown case clearly showed the dangers of jumping to conclusions too quickly.
But I would like to ask you, what should the officers have done to get him into the cruiser? Would it have been acceptable to just sit him down on the ground and wait for him to tire? Should they have then shackled his legs to prevent him from running? I respect your views (you probably know that I have “liked” many of your posts), so what would you have done? Do you think that the police should just ignore reports of crimes if the suspect refuses to comply?
Another honest question. Regardless of whether it is true or not that police are disproportionately killing young black men (you know my view is that they are not), do you think that a constant message that the police are out to get you, that your lives do not matter, that they are “racists”, etc. would likely lead to better or worse outcomes? Almost all police killings occur in the context of (1) the suspect actively attacking the officers in question (this is overwhelmingly the case), or (2) close in struggles where the suspect is resisting and is within “wingspan” of an officers weapon. To the extent that a suspect believes that the officer is going to murder him, because he has heard this all his life, will that make the encounter more or less risky for both the officer and the suspect?
I did not interpret it as excusing the actions. I thought the post was quite informative.
IMO, no one knows if it was murder because no one has all of the evidence.
As I said before, a person should not die for passing a phony $20 (if that charge is even true). I would be furious if that were my family member. The tactics and approach must change.
But to what extent is this the officer(s) fault, the system’s fault, etc.?
@OneMoreToGo2021 , asking what they should have done is a red herring argument. I refuse to go down that rabbit hole of a distraction.
What I know with 100% accuracy is that the way the killer handled the situation was wrong. W-R-O-N-G. Illegal, and I won’t bother spelling that out, too.
The killer committed an illegal act when he killed George Floyd, and he should be imprisoned for it. Do you disagree?
I think it has been established that there is sufficient ( more than sufficient) evidence that George Floyd could have been murdered. Until the officer(s) are found gulley, that has not been established. Hopefully, there will be enough people to serve as jurors who have an open mind to consider the evidence when presented fairly and without Prejudice . It will be a problem if a fair trial cannot be conducted.
Absolutely, @EconPop. I agree with you 100% on this point.
Unfortunately, this will not be the incident that changes anything because the majority of the people (the ones in power) feel that nothing really needs to be changed. Most have not experienced racism, discrimination, police brutality, poverty, poor educational system, broken communities, daily safety concerns, and law and rules designed to keep the status quo. They feel that the killing is much ado about nothing, one rogue cop gone bad. They don’t see the big picture, never have, never will…
The Georgia killing is a perfect example. Two white guys, one a former law enforcement official, chases down an unarmed black man because he thinks he is a criminal, corners him and shoots and kills him. This is horrible but its made even worse when prosecutors make no arrests for several months until the video was released to the general public and they had no choice but to arrest people. And you wonder why black people distrust law enforcement?
There will be a flash point and when that time comes we white Americans will be in a world of hurt as the civil unrest and anger will not be containable.
It’s really a shame because when certain factions of society have great power, they need to use that power with great responsibility, but unfortunately that is not happening.
Maybe this is a wake up call…I hope so, but I have my doubts (did much change happen after Rodney King, Trayvon Martin, etc.) as it takes great introspection, admit our failings and taking real action in rectifying these systematic problems in our society, …what leaders will emerge to take on this challenge and can they garner the support of the majority?