Bad Boys II

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(05-28-2020, 08:27 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: I don't know if there will be union backing. What I have seen from the LE community has been nearly universal condemnation. I follow a lot of current and former LEOs on social media and every post about this situation I have seen from them is condemning it.

For some reason this incident made me think to look in here for the response.  I am pleasantly surprised for the most part.  There is zero excuse for what this guy did, zero.  You don't put your knee on someone's neck intentionally, and you certainly don't hold someone down that way for over seven minutes.  Honestly, I can't even comprehend what this guy was thinking.  If you're a sadist then you're trying to hurt the guy, but even if you're that type of odious human being why would you do that in front of numerous people recording you?  Like I said, I literally can't fathom this guy's behavior, it's a combination of sadism and extreme idiocy.  Now his actions tar all of law enforcement with the same brush.  It will be used as fodder for the type of person who hates law enforcement for decades, and yes there is a not insubstantial number of those people.  It will put the lives of LEO's everywhere in jeopardy.  


As far as union backing, they're obligated to defend a union member, it's why you pay dues.  It's analogous to a defense attorney defending their client to the hilt regardless of how vile the crime committed.  The other three officers may well get their jobs back, depending on who was senior officer on scene etc. but not the main dude, he's dust.  I would be very surprised if he doesn't get a conviction for voluntary manslaughter.  If you're looking for murder one you're setting yourself up for failure.  Overcharging to please the people would be a horrible mistake as it would substantially increase the chances of him getting off.  While there is a "depraved heart" road to getting there it's definitely not a sure thing.  Third degree murder is a slam dunk though.

[GMDino]

(05-28-2020, 12:04 PM)michaelsean Wrote: That guy's going to prison.  They protect each other when they can, but they aren't letting the whole ship sink because of one dumbass who really has no defense.  

We'll see.

[GMDino]

This is from two days ago:

https://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2020/05/26/george-floyd-man-dies-after-being-arrested-by-minneapolis-police-fbi-called-to-investigate/

Quote:On Tuesday afternoon, the office of lawyer Tom Kelly confirmed they were representing one of the officers involved in the case, and confirmed his identity as Derek Chauvin. The identities of the other officers involved have not been released.


At the Tuesday morning press conference alongside the mayor, Minneapolis Police Chief Medaria Arradondo — who fired the four officers involved — did not address the video specifically, but did say that he received information from the community that prompted him to reach out to the FBI. The investigation is now being led by federal authorities with help from the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension.

Officials from the FBI’s Minneapolis division released a statement Tuesday afternoon, saying in part the “investigation will focus on whether the Minneapolis Police Department officers involved willfully deprived the individual of a right or privilege protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States.”

Lt. Bob Kroll, president of the Police Officers Federation of Minneapolis, said that the union intends to provide full support to the officers.

“Now is not the time rush to judgement and immediately condemn our officers,” Kroll said. “An in-depth investigation is underway. Our officers are fully cooperating. We must review all video. We must wait for the medical examiner’s report.”

The Hennepin County Medical Examiner’s office released a preliminary report early Tuesday evening, which just lists Floyd’s name, age, city of residence, and his time of death, which was Monday at 9:25 p.m.

Any one of us, who isn't a police officer, would be jail while they investigated.

Any of us.

So, we'll see.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(05-28-2020, 01:12 PM)GMDino Wrote: This is from two days ago:

https://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2020/05/26/george-floyd-man-dies-after-being-arrested-by-minneapolis-police-fbi-called-to-investigate/



Any one of us, who isn't a police officer, would be jail while they investigated.

Any of us.

So, we'll see.

Probably because potential use of force against a fellow citizen isn't a part of your job description.  

[GMDino]

(05-28-2020, 01:42 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Probably because potential use of force against a fellow citizen isn't a part of your job description.  

Is definitely killing them?

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(05-28-2020, 02:03 PM)GMDino Wrote: Is definitely killing them?

Glad to see you haven't changed at all.  Unfortunately, yes, lethal force is part of the LEO mandate and job description.  While this is certainly not a typical, or intentional, (although it certainly is a negligent) use of lethal force the fact that such actions fall within the remit of the LEO job description means that they will not be subject to immediate censure for using lethal force the same way a person who does not have such responsibilities would be. 

I'll put it this way, for the benefit of others.  If a non LEO uses lethal force defending their home, even is such force appears excessive, they will, far more often than not, remain free pending the results of an investigation.  If a CCW civilian is involved in a shooting in which there appears to be justification for the shooting then they will, far more often than not, remain free pending the results of the investigation.  In this instance it is readily apparent that the use of force was unjustified, however that does not eliminate the need for due process.  If you prefer otherwise then we can skip the need for a trial for anyone caught on video committing a crime, after all, they obviously broke the law because we saw it, right?

This man will be arrested, and barring an overcharge meant to appease the public, will be convicted.  Whinging about his not being immediately arrested only shows a lack of understanding of the process.  Look at it logically instead of emotionally and it becomes obvious to anyone inclined to view it this way.  He'll be arrested and convicted, that's what's important.  Let the process play out.

[GMDino]

(05-28-2020, 03:56 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Glad to see you haven't changed at all.  Unfortunately, yes, lethal force is part of the LEO mandate and job description.  While this is certainly not a typical, or intentional, (although it certainly is a negligent) use of lethal force the fact that such actions fall within the remit of the LEO job description means that they will not be subject to immediate censure for using lethal force the same way a person who does not have such responsibilities would be. 

I'll put it this way, for the benefit of others.  If a non LEO uses lethal force defending their home, even is such force appears excessive, they will, far more often than not, remain free pending the results of an investigation.  If a CCW civilian is involved in a shooting in which there appears to be justification for the shooting then they will, far more often than not, remain free pending the results of the investigation.  In this instance it is readily apparent that the use of force was unjustified, however that does not eliminate the need for due process.  If you prefer otherwise then we can skip the need for a trial for anyone caught on video committing a crime, after all, they obviously broke the law because we saw it, right?

This man will be arrested, and barring an overcharge meant to appease the public, will be convicted.  Whinging about his not being immediately arrested only shows a lack of understanding of the process.  Look at it logically instead of emotionally and it becomes obvious to anyone inclined to view it this way.  He'll be arrested and convicted, that's what's important.  Let the process play out.

I guess we'll see.

Doesn't happen very often.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/police-officers-convicted-fatal-shootings-are-exception-not-rule-n982741

And that's just shootings.  Not situations like this where the man was choked to death.  I don't know if any of those were every convicted.  But few are caught on film.

And you're right, I haven't changed while you were "gone".  I still believe if you have a "mandate and job description" that includes the use of lethal force you should be held to a higher standard in general and especially when it is used.

So, we'll see.  

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(05-28-2020, 04:02 PM)GMDino Wrote: I guess we'll see.

Doesn't happen very often.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/police-officers-convicted-fatal-shootings-are-exception-not-rule-n982741

It shouldn't happen very often.  As lethal force is within the remit of the LEO job description you have to go quite a bit further to prove criminal intent when it is used by them.  This is by design.  It's no different than judicial or prosecutorial immunity.  It's set up to prevent political motivations from stifling the working of the criminal justice system.

Quote:And that's just shootings.  Not situations like this where the man was choked to death.  I don't know if any of those were every convicted.  But few are caught on film.

Has the cause of death been determined?  I am not aware of the cause being disclosed.  I say that because I'm honestly curious.

Quote:And you're right, I haven't changed while you were "gone".  I still believe if you have a "mandate and job description" that includes the use of lethal force you should be held to a higher standard in general and especially when it is used.

A "higher standard" in what regard?  In not being immediately arrested and prosecuted when such force occurs?  I'm fine with a higher standard, it just needs to be clearly delineated, not decided on a case by case basis.

Quote:So, we'll see.  

Exactly.

[Vas Deferens]

(05-28-2020, 03:56 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: This man will be arrested, and barring an overcharge meant to appease the public, will be convicted.  Whinging about his not being immediately arrested only shows a lack of understanding of the process.  Look at it logically instead of emotionally and it becomes obvious to anyone inclined to view it this way.  He'll be arrested and convicted, that's what's important.  Let the process play out.

1st - Glad to hear your perspective.

2nd - You're spot on with the above.  Anyone who doesn't like 'the process' needs to take that up with the process itself and work toward reforming them for the better.   

[GMDino]

(05-28-2020, 05:15 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: 1st - Glad to hear your perspective.

2nd - You're spot on with the above.  Anyone who doesn't like 'the process' needs to take that up with the process itself and work toward reforming them for the better.   

I guess I just come from it that the "process" should be super intensive every time an officer kills someone.  If we are giving a group of people the right to kill as part of the job description every time that happens it should be judged.  Every time.  Case by case.   Because as a society we have to know that people entrusted with such a power never, ever abuse it.

That is what I mean about holding them to a higher standard. 

[Belsnickel]

(05-28-2020, 08:37 PM)GMDino Wrote: I guess I just come from it that the "process" should be super intensive every time an officer kills someone.  If we are giving a group of people the right to kill as part of the job description every time that happens it should be judged.  Every time.  Case by case.   Because as a society we have to know that people entrusted with such a power never, ever abuse it.

That is what I mean about holding them to a higher standard. 

Coming at this from the policy perspective, this is tough. Not saying I disagree with you, just that what we want is very difficult to do.

So, first, we have to acknowledge that there is human error. LEOs are being asked to make split-second decisions in situations that the body is not in its best decision-making mode for. In addition, they are often tasked with roles they are not trained for and we expect them to carry them out without error. Please note, this part does not apply to the shit stain in Minneapolis. Kneeling on dude's neck for over seven minutes is inexcusable.

Second, who does the investigating? Civilian review boards often don't understand what I just described. District Attorneys are often working with LEOs and tasking them with investigating a department they work with can damage a valuable relationship. IA and/or state police have the perception to fight against of the "blue wall of silence" (I think that's what it's called) and the public won't necessarily trust cops investigating themselves.

Third, what do you do with the officer once charged and potentially convicted? I'm a strong advocate against solitary confinement because it is cruel and unusual based on the research surrounding it, but putting a cop in prison or jail? That's not going to turn out well.

There is a lot more to it all than this, but these are just some basic considerations that came to mind when thinking about this. As an analyst, I would have to look at all of these things and try to create a policy that would be effective to recommend to lawmakers. This isn't me saying that we shouldn't do it, this is me saying that we have attempted to create a process and it is imperfect. It is imperfect because this is a difficult thing to solve.

[GMDino]

(05-28-2020, 09:06 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Coming at this from the policy perspective, this is tough. Not saying I disagree with you, just that what we want is very difficult to do.

So, first, we have to acknowledge that there is human error. LEOs are being asked to make split-second decisions in situations that the body is not in its best decision-making mode for. In addition, they are often tasked with roles they are not trained for and we expect them to carry them out without error. Please note, this part does not apply to the shit stain in Minneapolis. Kneeling on dude's neck for over seven minutes is inexcusable.

Second, who does the investigating? Civilian review boards often don't understand what I just described. District Attorneys are often working with LEOs and tasking them with investigating a department they work with can damage a valuable relationship. IA and/or state police have the perception to fight against of the "blue wall of silence" (I think that's what it's called) and the public won't necessarily trust cops investigating themselves.

Third, what do you do with the officer once charged and potentially convicted? I'm a strong advocate against solitary confinement because it is cruel and unusual based on the research surrounding it, but putting a cop in prison or jail? That's not going to turn out well.

There is a lot more to it all than this, but these are just some basic considerations that came to mind when thinking about this. As an analyst, I would have to look at all of these things and try to create a policy that would be effective to recommend to lawmakers. This isn't me saying that we shouldn't do it, this is me saying that we have attempted to create a process and it is imperfect. It is imperfect because this is a difficult thing to solve.

We agree more than we disagree.

Everything you say there just reinforces how serious it has to be taken when an officer takes a life.  And that that process must constantly be checked and revised and improved where possible.  Would a special "cop jail" be appropriate? And if it's found that one did kill or steal or whatever does that lack of potential safety mean they shouldn't couldn't be punished?

Officers have immense power.  They can take your freedom, your property and your life.  That kind of power need constant vigilance.  Do I know exactly how to do that perfectly?  Of course not.  But that doesn't mean it doesn't need done.  

[*bfine32*]

(05-28-2020, 12:10 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: For some reason this incident made me think to look in here for the response.  I am pleasantly surprised for the most part.  There is zero excuse for what this guy did, zero.  You don't put your knee on someone's neck intentionally, and you certainly don't hold someone down that way for over seven minutes.  Honestly, I can't even comprehend what this guy was thinking.  If you're a sadist then you're trying to hurt the guy, but even if you're that type of odious human being why would you do that in front of numerous people recording you?  Like I said, I literally can't fathom this guy's behavior, it's a combination of sadism and extreme idiocy.  Now his actions tar all of law enforcement with the same brush.  It will be used as fodder for the type of person who hates law enforcement for decades, and yes there is a not insubstantial number of those people.  It will put the lives of LEO's everywhere in jeopardy.  


As far as union backing, they're obligated to defend a union member, it's why you pay dues.  It's analogous to a defense attorney defending their client to the hilt regardless of how vile the crime committed.  The other three officers may well get their jobs back, depending on who was senior officer on scene etc. but not the main dude, he's dust.  I would be very surprised if he doesn't get a conviction for voluntary manslaughter.  If you're looking for murder one you're setting yourself up for failure.  Overcharging to please the people would be a horrible mistake as it would substantially increase the chances of him getting off.  While there is a "depraved heart" road to getting there it's definitely not a sure thing.  Third degree murder is a slam dunk though.

No doubt the LEOs in this episode (at least 2 of which were of color) acted negligently and should pay for their actions. It's exactly why I took exception to Pat following up the report of this atrocity with a story, in which, the LEOs did nothing wrong. It's that "broad brush" mentality you point to. 

[*michaelsean*]

(05-28-2020, 12:16 PM)GMDino Wrote: We'll see.

I don’t know anyone even attempting to find a justification for this guy. I’m sure someone somewhere on the internet is, but outside of maybe the North Carolina guy I’ve never seen this kind of universal condemnation.

[GMDino]

(05-28-2020, 10:53 PM)michaelsean Wrote: I don’t know anyone even attempting to find a justification for this guy. I’m sure someone somewhere on the internet is, but outside of maybe the North Carolina guy I’ve never seen this kind of universal condemnation.

I agree *this* particular episode seems to have a very high level of support for prosecution from even the fellow police.

Then an idiot says something like this rather than say nothing at all:

EDIT: I wanted to use this tweet instead because it explains that he issued a retraction AFTER to clarify.

This is the problem with holding a press conference when your plan is to not say anything. He later issued a statement backtracking from this, but how many are going to see that? The damage is done. https://t.co/P4FMUB8Wmk

— Jon Krawczynski (@JonKrawczynski) May 29, 2020

Sure he has to remain neutral and look at all the evidence.  Also there is a video of the officer not following his training and killing a man on the street...over a possible fake $20 bill.


If he's arrested and if there is a trial and if there is a conviction it will show the level it takes to prove such a case.  And then it will get the "well one bad apple, yadda, yadda" treatment.

[BmorePat87]

Minnesota state police arrested a CNN reporter of color and his crew while he was live on the air.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/29/us/minneapolis-cnn-crew-arrested/index.html

The CNN crew was reporting live when a protestor ran behind them. State police advanced to arrest the protestor before them grabbing reporter Omar Jimenez's arm. As he showed his press credentials and asked where the crew could move to in order to be out of the way, suggesting that their previous spot was one that they were previously told they could be in, one of the officers told him he was under arrest and began handcuffing him. CNN was later told the arrest occurred because the crew did not move when told to, though the audio does not support that account.

The governor of Minnesota apologizes and said the crew would be immediately released.

Another CNN reporter in the city who is white also had the police approach him in a separate location, but he was told he was allowed to be there when he showed his press credentials.

[BmorePat87]

Trump tweeted out about the "thug" protestors (not "thug" officer who murdered Floyd?) and suggested that they be shot.

....These THUGS are dishonoring the memory of George Floyd, and I won’t let that happen. Just spoke to Governor Tim Walz and told him that the Military is with him all the way. Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts. Thank you!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 29, 2020

Twitter put a warning on the tweet saying that it was "glorifying violence" but would remain up because it may be in the public's interest to remain accessible.

[GMDino]

(05-29-2020, 09:23 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Minnesota state police arrested a CNN reporter of color and his crew while he was live on the air.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/29/us/minneapolis-cnn-crew-arrested/index.html

The CNN crew was reporting live when a protestor ran behind them. State police advanced to arrest the protestor before them grabbing reporter Omar Jimenez's arm. As he showed his press credentials and asked where the crew could move to in order to be out of the way, suggesting that their previous spot was one that they were previously told they could be in, one of the officers told him he was under arrest and began handcuffing him. CNN was later told the arrest occurred because the crew did not move when told to, though the audio does not support that account.

The governor of Minnesota apologizes and said the crew would be immediately released.

Another CNN reporter in the city who is white also had the police approach him in a separate location, but he was told he was allowed to be there when he showed his press credentials.

Almost like racism is still alive and well....

[Belsnickel]

I really don't know what to say about the situation in Minneapolis. So many things come to mind, but I check my privilege and decide to shut my mouth because I don't really know enough about it all. The frustration people of color feel in situations like this has to be heavy. I just don't ever understand the destruction of the community when this sort of thing happens, but my life experiences are different.

[GMDino]

(05-29-2020, 09:41 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: I really don't know what to say about the situation in Minneapolis. So many things come to mind, but I check my privilege and decide to shut my mouth because I don't really know enough about it all. The frustration people of color feel in situations like this has to be heavy. I just don't ever understand the destruction of the community when this sort of thing happens, but my life experiences are different.

Honestly I have always chalked the rioters up to different life experiences in how to deal with issues and the looters and opportunists that use the cover to steal as they normally would.

But then I see gangs of armed white people storm the state capitol so they can demand they can go eat out and get haircuts and I wonder how different I react than so many other people.