Yes or No: Minneapolis police officers involved in George Floyd arrest should be acquitted

Court of LAWS wrote:

fasciz wrote:

You really don't know the answer to whether or not I think he should've taken the knee off of the suspect that he rendered unconscious?

Answer: Yes, I would have been okay with it. Further, it is hard for an unconscious person to thrash around.

How often are you dealing with people hooped up on drugs and alcohol?

Enough to state that you shouldn't continue to kneel on the neck of someone you've rendered unconscious.

fasciz wrote:

Court of LAWS wrote:

If D.C. would have gotten off at any point and then G.F. began thrashing around and smashed his face into the pavement would you be the one saying D.C. should have maintained him in a subdued position until he medics arrived, or would you be okay with him smashing his own face into the pavement ?

You really don't know the answer to whether or not I think he should've taken the knee off of the suspect that he rendered unconscious?

Answer: Yes, I would have been okay with it. Further, it is hard for an unconscious person to thrash around.

"he rendered unconscious"

You presume it was not the drugs, particularly fentanyl and methamphetamine, in his system that rendered Floyd unconscious. There is nothing that could be said or done on this earth to change your mind on that. Not even a toxicology report or evidence that, in the past, Floyd had swallowed drugs to avoid being found in possession.

Muldoon wrote:

fasciz wrote:

You really don't know the answer to whether or not I think he should've taken the knee off of the suspect that he rendered unconscious?

Answer: Yes, I would have been okay with it. Further, it is hard for an unconscious person to thrash around.

"he rendered unconscious"

You presume it was not the drugs, particularly fentanyl and methamphetamine, in his system that rendered Floyd unconscious. There is nothing that could be said or done on this earth to change your mind on that. Not even a toxicology report or evidence that, in the past, Floyd had swallowed drugs to avoid being found in possession.

I'm using deductive reasoning based on the very convenient timing of falling unconscious precisely after a couple minutes of having someone's knee in his neck, yes.

fasciz wrote:

Muldoon wrote:

"he rendered unconscious"

You presume it was not the drugs, particularly fentanyl and methamphetamine, in his system that rendered Floyd unconscious. There is nothing that could be said or done on this earth to change your mind on that. Not even a toxicology report or evidence that, in the past, Floyd had swallowed drugs to avoid being found in possession.

I'm using deductive reasoning based on the very convenient timing of falling unconscious precisely after a couple minutes of having someone's knee in his neck, yes.

No, that's not deductive reasoning. Any kind of deductive reasoning would also take into account the lethal amounts of fentanyl in Floyd's system, as well what you saw in the video. What you are doing is something else. It could be called inductive reasoning, but that might be a bit generous.

Yes amigo

Muldoon wrote:

fasciz wrote:

I'm using deductive reasoning based on the very convenient timing of falling unconscious precisely after a couple minutes of having someone's knee in his neck, yes.

No, that's not deductive reasoning. Any kind of deductive reasoning would also take into account the lethal amounts of fentanyl in Floyd's system, as well what you saw in the video. What you are doing is something else. It could be called inductive reasoning, but that might be a bit generous.

The drugs are taken into account as well. Are you saying the knee was not operative to him falling unconscious, and simultaneously accusing ME of not being deductive?

Regardless, it is not appropriate to continue to kneel on his neck after he is unconscious.

fasciz wrote:

Muldoon wrote:

No, that's not deductive reasoning. Any kind of deductive reasoning would also take into account the lethal amounts of fentanyl in Floyd's system, as well what you saw in the video. What you are doing is something else. It could be called inductive reasoning, but that might be a bit generous.

The drugs are taken into account as well. Are you saying the knee was not operative to him falling unconscious, and simultaneously accusing ME of not being deductive?

No. I wasn't doing that. I think you're aware I wasn't doing that.

This started with you stating "he [Chauvin] rendered [Floyd] unconscious" when there is evidence that the likely reason Floyd became unconscious was that he had lethal amount of fentanyl in his system. Fentanyl causes respiratory distress, including heart attack and death.

So your statement that "he [Chauvin] rendered [Floyd] unconscious" was would most certainly not be an example of deductive reasoning, unless you know facts that the rest of us do not. It would maybe be inductive reasoning. But the more you post on this, the more I believe it is just disingenuous bias.

And as I mentioned above, this is all evaluated under the reasonable doubt standard of criminal law. I don't know any type of reasoning - deductive, inductive or otherwise - where lethal amounts of drugs in a person (an overdose) do not create reasonable doubt as to whether the person was murdered (unless its being suggested that Floyd did not ingest the drugs willingly).

So you acknowledge that the knee was operative in Floyd becoming unconscious?

Do you think it is appropriate to continue kneel on a suspect’s neck after they are unconscious?

As much as I want Chauvin to be charged w murder. With how things are in this country he probably won’t. I think he will get a manslaughter charge and will get somewhat minimal jail time or an eventual reduced sentence for good behavior. He shouldn’t have zero legal consequences and I think everyone knows that he should be punished in some way. The defense is going to make the argument of the drugs in his system as well as the knee on neck being a way of restraint. (I know police departments are eliminating that practice as well) Maybe Chauvin is a huge racist and had full intent of murder while on his neck but we won’t know that so the court will not think it’s premeditated. I think Floyd’s “I can’t breathe” can be a valid reason why he can be charged w murder as he kept his knee on his neck after. But no one will be satisfied w the result and protests will fire back up again. Especially w the warmer weather

I bet I could kneel on your neck for 10 minutes without causing any harm to you. If you struggle, there might be some light bruising. If you don't struggle you will be able to breathe perfectly.

DC has/had a minority wife and minority friends. Hardly a racist.

GF was saying he can't breathe when he was sitting on the ground untouched and when he was being put in the squad car. Are you aware of any the the side effects from a fentanyl OD?

fasciz wrote:

Court of LAWS wrote:

How often are you dealing with people hooped up on drugs and alcohol?

Enough to state that you shouldn't continue to kneel on the neck of someone you've rendered unconscious.

You have much to learn, young man!

All I want is 12 Fair, Unbiased and Anti Racist to render a verdict based on the evidence and have it televised so everyone who is interested can watch to see why the jurors came to the verdict that everyone will be happy was fair and just.

Personally I think something is wrong when someone says they can't breath and is already handcuffed, to stay away from the air passageways, So unless shown otherwise I think he is guilty (Personally I would recuse myself as I am biased and with me he would have to prove his Innocence, but the prosecution has to prove his guilt, so I am biased, also if people threaten me I will do the opposite of what they want even if it is wrong, not cowering to me is more important than any case, so I could not be fair IF threatened and you know the jurors will be threatened.

Anyway no one talks about Chauvin and Floyd worked with each other as bouncers at a bar, so I am thinking it is a personal grudge. Anyway it is fine if he is convicted and it is fine if he is acquitted I just hope its fair and everyone is happy either way, but if there are riots, cool, I actually enjoy it, it is entertainment, I don't participate, but I watch it on TV.

12 Jurors

douglas burke wrote:

Anyway it is fine if he is convicted and it is fine if he is acquitted I just hope its fair and everyone is happy either way, but if there are riots, cool, I actually enjoy it, it is entertainment, I don't participate, but I watch it on TV.

I've read some pretty sick stuff on these boards but given what happened last summer this comment takes the cake.

-Krispy

Hejendo76 wrote:

As much as I want Chauvin to be charged w murder.

...

He shouldn’t have zero legal consequences and I think everyone knows that he should be punished in some way.

Why would you want someone who didn't do anything wrong or against the law be charged with murder??

You say he shouldn't have zero legal consequences...? His life has been turned upside down for *following department protocol*...

In summary, DC has been: fired, divorced, had his name dragged through the mud, will have huge attorney fees, and his name will be associated with this event for the rest of his life (negatively affecting future job prospects and relationships) - *all for doing his job*.

Krispy's Kall: DC gets acquitted and then turns around and sues the city and media outlets for tens of millions.

Muldoon wrote:

survey sayss wrote:

Yes

Toxicology report says Floyd has lethal amounts of fentanyl in his body. That's "reasonable doubt" under any formulation of the law. It probably won't be enough to satisfy the mob, but acquittal is the only legally sound outcome here. And that's for Chauvin. I have no idea how those other three cops even got charged, other than mob rules.

Floyd's death was a tragedy to begin with, and it's only compounded by charging the cops involved. And, of course, we have the BLM riots to make the whole thing a disgusting spectacle.

Judge says: This is the correct take.

douglas burke wrote:

Personally I think something is wrong when someone says they can't breath and is already handcuffed, to stay away from the air passageways, .

The problem with that rationale is that people (especially people that are high on drugs) do not tell the truth. He said he couldn't breathe long before they restrained him. They asked him what drugs he had been using that he did not answer (the truth is he had a blood serum of fentanyl in his system that was three times the concentration that is typically fatal).

Had he been telling the truth (which he had not), the EMTs would have administered narcan and he would likely be alive today. Instead, they administered a sedative (because he had been resisting arrest, and the last thing they want is a person to wake up and become combative in the back of an ambulance) which heightened the respiratory depression caused by the fentanyl and the restraint. It's an unfortunate situation, but Floyd died from his own actions by not complying, resisting arrest and not disclosing his drug use. A healthy non-drug addled individual would likely have survived the restraint.

Great post!

However, had he just sat in the back of the police car when initially placed there - he may still have OD'd, or would still be in jail. Either way, no restraint would have been needed and most of the world would not know his name. Our country would also NOT be as divided and so many lives and businesses would still be here instead of buried or burned to the ground!