Four Minneapolis officers fired after death of black man part II

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • spencer rifle

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    70   0   0
    Apr 15, 2011
    6,819
    149
    Scrounging brass
    Not everything presented in court is accepted as evidence. That's not up to the jury. The civil case I was involved in had a photograph that clearly showed no damage to the vehicle where it would be expected if the defendant was correct. That photo was not accepted as evidence, even though we all saw it.
     

    bobzilla

    Mod in training (in my own mind)
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Nov 1, 2010
    9,477
    113
    Brownswhitanon.
    I’ve certainly played Devil’s Advocate. It’s what thinking people do; consider the other side. I’m sorry if it hurts your feelings so much that you need to repeat it so often.
    I’m just making sure that people understand whom they are dealing with. Not my feelings at all, you don’t take up space in my head. Just warning others to not fall into your traps.
     

    Keith_Indy

    Master
    Rating - 95.2%
    20   1   0
    Mar 10, 2009
    3,287
    113
    Noblesville
    Do you understand how this sounds like saying, "Vote Cthulu. Why settle for the lesser evil?"

    *For the non-nerds, Cthulu is a malevolent omnipotent deity from a role playing game that was popular when I was in college.

    How dare you reduce it to a figure in a role playing game... :P

    20100701_cthulhu_poster.jpg

    The caption translates as "Choose the greater evil. Vote Cthulhu."
     

    Keith_Indy

    Master
    Rating - 95.2%
    20   1   0
    Mar 10, 2009
    3,287
    113
    Noblesville
    Kind of amazes me how many legal experts we have on INGO...

    How long till sentencing? Will the usual suspects be up in arms if Chauvin gets an insufficiently harsh sentence? (rhetorical question, of course they will.)

     

    BugI02

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 4, 2013
    32,557
    149
    Columbus, OH
    Absolutely. And would do it again without a second thought. How many more times do you need me to say it?
    Yet you wonder why the diagnosis is TDS. If you think the current US situation is somehow going to result in the end of 'systemic racism', black and white people living together in peace and harmony and fundamental change to the way the majority think you are sadly mistaken and fundamentally unable to realize Trump was your best chance to achieve that also

    IMO this will end in blood, and whose and how much is as yet uncertain. It's a lot harder to end 'the troubles' than it is to start them
     

    KG1

    Forgotten Man
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    66   0   0
    Jan 20, 2009
    26,169
    149
    Kind of amazes me how many legal experts we have on INGO...

    How long till sentencing? Will the usual suspects be up in arms if Chauvin gets an insufficiently harsh sentence? (rhetorical question, of course they will.)

    Maximum or else we mob some more.
     

    JCSR

    NO STAGE PLAN
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 11, 2017
    10,003
    133
    Santa Claus
    All true, but what did everyone expect to happen?
    Two things could have easily changed the outcome. One if the cops had tossed GF in the back of the Explorer and hauled him to the PD ASAP. GF would have "probably" ODed on the way. Number two : GF was white. The trial and this thread would not exist.
     

    rooster

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    Mar 4, 2010
    3,306
    113
    Indianapolis
    Lots of mud slinging and hard words going around here. Bias is showing on all sides. :stickpoke:

    while I have my own opinions on the 3 charges, I don’t see how anyone can defend him from the manslaughter 2 charge. Let’s lay out some legal speak to clarify my point.
    From the code

    609.205 MANSLAUGHTER IN THE SECOND DEGREE.​

    A person who causes the death of another by any of the following means is guilty of manslaughter in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than ten years or to payment of a fine of not more than $20,000, or both:
    (1) by the person's culpable negligence whereby the person creates an unreasonable risk, and consciously takes chances of causing death or great bodily harm to another; or
    (2) by shooting another with a firearm or other dangerous weapon as a result of negligently believing the other to be a deer or other animal; or
    (3) by setting a spring gun, pit fall, deadfall, snare, or other like dangerous weapon or device; or
    (4) by negligently or intentionally permitting any animal, known by the person to have vicious propensities or to have caused great or substantial bodily harm in the past, to run uncontrolled off the owner's premises, or negligently failing to keep it properly confined; or
    (5) by committing or attempting to commit a violation of section 609.378 (neglect or endangerment of a child), and murder in the first, second, or third degree is not committed thereby.
    If proven by a preponderance of the evidence, it shall be an affirmative defense to criminal liability under clause (4) that the victim provoked the animal to cause the victim's death.

    culpable negligence-
    Culpable negligence means recklessly acting without reasonable caution and putting another person at risk of injury or death (or failing to do something with the same consequences).

    It is the omission to do something which a reasonable, prudent and honest man would do, or the doing something which such a man would not do under all the circumstances surrounding each particular case.

    From the Minneapolis Police policy manual page 235


    MedicalTreatmentandUseofForce
    1. Any sworn MPD employee who uses force shall, as soon as reasonably practical, determine if anyone was injured and render medical aid consistent with training and request Emergency Medical Service (EMS) if necessary (in accordance with P&P 7-350). Some force control options involve or require additional medical attention. This includes subjects who have visible injuries, lose consciousness, complain of injury or request medical attention


    now in regard to manslaughter charge. Chauvin got comfy on his neck/back, even put his hands in his pockets. Floyd went limp/unconscious. At that point he was required to render aid as soon as “reasonably practical”. He failed to do this, it’s plain to see from the videos that he spends several minutes comfortably resting on Floyd’s neck/ back after he goes limp/unconscious and stops fighting. His failure to provide aid as required per MPD policy resulted in death.

    this makes him legally guilty of manslaughter 2, regardless of your feelings about BLM, Maxine waters or anyone else. About the other charges I don’t know but I don’t see how anyone can read the legal definitions, watch the videos and say they have a reasonable doubt that had chauvin rendered aid when he went limp that Floyd would have still died.
     

    femurphy77

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    30   0   0
    Mar 5, 2009
    20,321
    113
    S.E. of disorder
    Lots of mud slinging and hard words going around here. Bias is showing on all sides. :stickpoke:

    while I have my own opinions on the 3 charges, I don’t see how anyone can defend him from the manslaughter 2 charge. Let’s lay out some legal speak to clarify my point.
    From the code

    609.205 MANSLAUGHTER IN THE SECOND DEGREE.​

    A person who causes the death of another by any of the following means is guilty of manslaughter in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than ten years or to payment of a fine of not more than $20,000, or both:
    (1) by the person's culpable negligence whereby the person creates an unreasonable risk, and consciously takes chances of causing death or great bodily harm to another; or
    (2) by shooting another with a firearm or other dangerous weapon as a result of negligently believing the other to be a deer or other animal; or
    (3) by setting a spring gun, pit fall, deadfall, snare, or other like dangerous weapon or device; or
    (4) by negligently or intentionally permitting any animal, known by the person to have vicious propensities or to have caused great or substantial bodily harm in the past, to run uncontrolled off the owner's premises, or negligently failing to keep it properly confined; or
    (5) by committing or attempting to commit a violation of section 609.378 (neglect or endangerment of a child), and murder in the first, second, or third degree is not committed thereby.
    If proven by a preponderance of the evidence, it shall be an affirmative defense to criminal liability under clause (4) that the victim provoked the animal to cause the victim's death.

    culpable negligence-
    Culpable negligence means recklessly acting without reasonable caution and putting another person at risk of injury or death (or failing to do something with the same consequences).

    It is the omission to do something which a reasonable, prudent and honest man would do, or the doing something which such a man would not do under all the circumstances surrounding each particular case.

    From the Minneapolis Police policy manual page 235


    MedicalTreatmentandUseofForce
    1. Any sworn MPD employee who uses force shall, as soon as reasonably practical, determine if anyone was injured and render medical aid consistent with training and request Emergency Medical Service (EMS) if necessary (in accordance with P&P 7-350). Some force control options involve or require additional medical attention. This includes subjects who have visible injuries, lose consciousness, complain of injury or request medical attention


    now in regard to manslaughter charge. Chauvin got comfy on his neck/back, even put his hands in his pockets. Floyd went limp/unconscious. At that point he was required to render aid as soon as “reasonably practical”. He failed to do this, it’s plain to see from the videos that he spends several minutes comfortably resting on Floyd’s neck/ back after he goes limp/unconscious and stops fighting. His failure to provide aid as required per MPD policy resulted in death.

    this makes him legally guilty of manslaughter 2, regardless of your feelings about BLM, Maxine waters or anyone else. About the other charges I don’t know but I don’t see how anyone can read the legal definitions, watch the videos and say they have a reasonable doubt that had chauvin rendered aid when he went limp that Floyd would have still died.
    Just to confirm relevancy is this Minnesota's definition?
     

    Sylvain

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Nov 30, 2010
    77,468
    113
    Normandy
    A jury is nothing more than 12 people too stupid to get out of jury duty. Especially in this case. No way in hell you'd see me on the jury for a high profile case like this.

    Saying someone is "too stupid to get out of jury duty" is like saying someone is "too stupid to avoid paying taxes".

    As the name implies it is your duty as a citizen.
    A lot of people don't try to "get ouf of it" and see it as a patriotic duty.

    Millions of people whish they could qualify for jury duty, and therefore enjoy all the privileges attached to being a US citizen.

    :twocents:
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    62,312
    113
    Gtown-ish
    You say it wasn’t proven. 12 people more versed than you on the subject disagreed. Wait. Are you or anyone here saying that their more competent concerning the details of this case than the 12 people on the jury? He was convicted by his peers. People who put well more time in on the subject than us armchair QBs. The ONLY fallback you guys have is the crackpot premise that all 12 of them, who in your opinion thought he wasn’t actually guilty, were intimidated into reaching the conclusions that they did. It’s easy to reject that, and think that people who say such are justifying why the jury didn’t reach the decision you wanted.

    Well, this is an interesting angle, I'll have to say that.

    Who knows that they're more well versed than me? They may have had their minds made up before the trial started. Or they may have been intimidated to vote how they did.

    And why do you insist people are saying things they didn't say? I think it's possible some of them may have been intimidated. What's been said by prominent public figures is intimidating.

    I'm basing my opinion on the above on many hours listening to the testimony, and the lengthy directions the judge gave. You don't like that I can come to a different conclusion than you so you have to try to belittle my point of view. Because none of it is actually the positions I hold, or how I based my own judgement, what you said isn't an argument. It's just :blahblah:

    Now if you just said that you thought I might be biased, well, okay. That's an opinion. I think you're biased. I think it's clouded your judgement. In fact, I suspect that if some things about demographics were changed to something outside of your bias, you might agree with me. I am very confident that demographics did not enter my thinking about Chauvin's guilt or innocence. I am pretty sure that it entered your thinking.
     

    Kutnupe14

    Troll Emeritus
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 13, 2011
    40,294
    149
    I’m just making sure that people understand whom they are dealing with. Not my feelings at all, you don’t take up space in my head. Just warning others to not fall into your traps.
    Bro my legs are tired from as much as I run around in your head. I don’t even think about you until you drop by a thread, not comment on the subject, just to comment on me. Have you even said anything in this thread, all 89 pages of it, that wasn’t in reference to me?
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    62,312
    113
    Gtown-ish
    I think the officer on Floyd's back caused more breathing problems than the knee on the shoulder.
    That's actually more believable. If his knee was preventing his lungs from expanding, that could cause problems breathing. Floyd had problems breathing in the car before he was restrained though. It's possible that Chauvin's knee on Floyd's back inhibited Floyd's breathing. We don't usually convict on "it's possiblbe". Saying "It's possible" implies reasonable doubt, especially when there is a plausible second explanation. Chauvin's knee on Floyd's back doesn't explain Floyd's trouble breathing when he was sitting in the squad car unrestrained.
     
    Top Bottom