|
Post by James T. Kirk on Apr 20, 2021 15:46:20 GMT -6
Any thoughts? I believe the jury got it right based on the testimony I heard. I know there will be people who celebrate and I guess I understand that, but to me it's a sad occasion all around. One man is dead and another is going to prison. There are no winners here.
There is one thing that struck me after the verdict was read that made me think about how this whole thing could have been avoided. The prosecution asked for Chauvin's bond to be revoked and that he be taken immediately into custody. The judge ordered it. Chauvin immediately rose, placed his hands behind his back and complied with the bailiff handcuffing him. How much misery could be avoided if everybody did that?
|
|
|
Post by garak on Apr 20, 2021 16:12:07 GMT -6
You are exactly right Kirk. My belief is that a lot of law officers have gotten a holier than thou attitude. In my opinion they have become too militaristic in so much that some think that the law does not apply to them. Not all of them, but enough that it taints the public perception of them.
|
|
|
Post by James T. Kirk on Apr 20, 2021 16:35:24 GMT -6
You are exactly right Kirk. My belief is that a lot of law officers have gotten a holier than thou attitude. In my opinion they have become too militaristic in so much that some think that the law does not apply to them. Not all of them, but enough that it taints the public perception of them. I'm not certain that was the situation in this case, although that could be. I know nothing about Chauvin or his history before this happened. I know it's a difficult and thankless job. No one calls the police to exchange pleasantries. I don't know why he did what he did the way he did. I also don't understand why people think they don't have to comply with the lawful orders of the police. Floyd was suspected of a Felony crime. The police had every right to detain him and question him. Courts have ruled that even if someone is innocent of an accusation, not that Floyd was, they do not have a constitutional right to resist arrest. Floyd did. However, unless Floyd attempted to use deadly force against the officers, Chauvin had no authority to use deadly force on him. If people would comply with the police when required to do so and let the courts decide innocence and guilt, these things would be less common. People have recourse against police in the civil courts if they are maliciously and falsely prosecuted.
|
|
|
Post by garak on Apr 20, 2021 16:38:36 GMT -6
I agree Kirk, however I stand by my statement that the police have become to militaristic and some, not all, think that they are the final judge and jury.
|
|
|
Post by lowell on Apr 20, 2021 16:40:51 GMT -6
Floyd allegedly passed a counterfeit $20. The police who investigated knew that it would be difficult to prosecute. How do you prove a person knows the money is counterfeit? Now if the person has a history of passing counterfeit money or had a wallet full of counterfeit money, that might be a reason for further investigation. Floyd should never have been handcuffed. The money needed to be proven to be counterfeit. Was that ever done? As I understand it the $20 had already been accepted and the clerk had second thoughts about it. It's rough for the clerk, but in retrospect the clerk realized he should not have called police. If it had been counterfeit, and that has never been said to be established, the clerk would have lost the money as his company docks the clerk's pay for bogus bills accepted. The police had to take a cruel and violent approach in an attempt to intimidate Floyd into something they could arrest him for. The police created the real crime here.
The police were looking for an arrestable offense. Floyd allegedly swallowed some drugs he had in his possession, but this was after the police took the original complaint too far. It was police being overly aggressive at every step that led to Chauvin realizing he had no choice but to be sure that the original offense never went to court. He felt he had to kill Floyd to cover for his mishandling of the original complaint; and he did.
If we consider the panicky resistance of Floyd to being put in the back seat of the car, a proper response by police would be to call an ambulance and have paramedics administer an appropriate drug to calm the arrestee. If they thought Floyd might be irrational and violent due to the drugs he allegedly swallowed, paramedics and emergency room would be the logical choice.
|
|
|
Post by James T. Kirk on Apr 20, 2021 17:07:10 GMT -6
Floyd allegedly passed a counterfeit $20. The police who investigated knew that it would be difficult to prosecute. How do you prove a person knows the money is counterfeit? Now if the person has a history of passing counterfeit money or had a wallet full of counterfeit money, that might be a reason for further investigation. Floyd should never have been handcuffed. The money needed to be proven to be counterfeit. Was that ever done? As I understand it the $20 had already been accepted and the clerk had second thoughts about it. It's rough for the clerk, but in retrospect the clerk realized he should not have called police. If it had been counterfeit, and that has never been said to be established, the clerk would have lost the money as his company docks the clerk's pay for bogus bills accepted. The police had to take a cruel and violent approach in an attempt to intimidate Floyd into something they could arrest him for. The police created the real crime here. And Chauvin was convicted of a crime. That isn't my point. The officers were summoned and had a legal right and obligation to investigate and answer the questions you posed. There was no further investigation because Floyd refused to cooperate. That refusal was not justification for kneeling on his back until he died. The only regret I heard the clerk express was that calling resulted in Floyd's death. I didn't hear him change his opinion that the bill was counterfeit. In fact, the prosecutor did show a photo of the bill Floyd had, as well as a second bill. Both had the same serial number, so there is no doubt one or both of them were counterfeit. But again, that isn't the issue. Floyd could have very easily cooperated, but he didn't. Chauvin and the other officer could have and should have done a better job of getting Floyd up off the pavement. As I said, a man is dead, another is going to prison and our country has gone through Hell for the last year and a half because of what they both did.
|
|
|
Post by lowell on Apr 20, 2021 17:20:45 GMT -6
They said he refused to cooperate. That was likely after they over-reacted to the original complaint. I don't look at the serial numbers of money that anyone gives me. Perhaps this needs to be taught in school as proper behavior. Like I said, knowing that the money is counterfeit and knowing that Floyd knew it was counterfeit, requires more evidence than the police had.
You know more about the money than I. This is the first I have heard about evidence of it being counterfeit. The clerk said that he noticed it had a color more like a hundred dollar bill. I guess the media reports I heard didn't consider it important. What does the law say about required cooperation? What are you required to provide police with? Why do I have to ask this question? Maybe the media should be more diligent about informing us of what we are required to provide. I do know about the Miranda decision. We can refuse some cooperation, and insist on having access to a lawyer.
"In the case of Miranda versus Arizona, in 1966, the Court ruled that, before questioning by the police, suspects must be informed that they have the right to remain silent and the right to consult an attorney, and that anything they say may be used against them in court."
Let's ask the clerk if he regrets calling the police.
"Store owner Mahmoud Abumayyaleh says he regrets the 911 call one of his employees made on George Floyd."
' Store owner Mahmoud Abumayyaleh has told multiple news outlets if he were at the store he would not have called police, a practice he is respected in the community for adhering to. “We don't call the police when counterfeit money is handed to us,” store owner Mahmoud Abumayyaleh told NPR Tuesday. “We teach the clerks to let one of the owners know. And we deal with it directly and tell the patron that he can, you know, give us the money, or the authorities can be called.” '
|
|
|
Post by James T. Kirk on Apr 20, 2021 17:58:26 GMT -6
They said he refused to cooperate. That was likely after they over-reacted to the original complaint. I don't look at the serial numbers of money that anyone gives me. Perhaps this needs to be taught in school as proper behavior. Like I said, knowing that the money is counterfeit and knowing that Floyd knew it was counterfeit, requires more evidence than the police had. You know more about the money than I. This is the first I have heard about evidence of it being counterfeit. The clerk said that he noticed it had a color more like a hundred dollar bill. I guess the media reports I heard didn't consider it important. What does the law say about required cooperation? What are you required to provide police with? Why do I have to ask this question? Maybe the media should be more diligent about informing us of what we are required to provide. I do know about the Miranda decision. We can refuse some cooperation, and insist on having access to a lawyer. "In the case of Miranda versus Arizona, in 1966, the Court ruled that, before questioning by the police, suspects must be informed that they have the right to remain silent and the right to consult an attorney, and that anything they say may be used against them in court." Let's ask the clerk if he regrets calling the police. "Store owner Mahmoud Abumayyaleh says he regrets the 911 call one of his employees made on George Floyd." ' Store owner Mahmoud Abumayyaleh has told multiple news outlets if he were at the store he would not have called police, a practice he is respected in the community for adhering to. “We don't call the police when counterfeit money is handed to us,” store owner Mahmoud Abumayyaleh told NPR Tuesday. “We teach the clerks to let one of the owners know. And we deal with it directly and tell the patron that he can, you know, give us the money, or the authorities can be called.” ' Whether he knew they were counterfeit is an issue for a court to decide. If police officers could make such decisions on a sidewalk there would be no need for judges. What the store owner told NPR after the fact is irrelevant. In actuality they did call the police or they would not have been there. In fact, I believe there is video of the clerk following Floyd to his car before police arrive. Of course a year and a half later everyone regrets what happened and wants to minimize what part they played. t
|
|
|
Post by garak on Apr 20, 2021 18:31:51 GMT -6
They said he refused to cooperate. That was likely after they over-reacted to the original complaint. I don't look at the serial numbers of money that anyone gives me. Perhaps this needs to be taught in school as proper behavior. Like I said, knowing that the money is counterfeit and knowing that Floyd knew it was counterfeit, requires more evidence than the police had. You know more about the money than I. This is the first I have heard about evidence of it being counterfeit. The clerk said that he noticed it had a color more like a hundred dollar bill. I guess the media reports I heard didn't consider it important. What does the law say about required cooperation? What are you required to provide police with? Why do I have to ask this question? Maybe the media should be more diligent about informing us of what we are required to provide. I do know about the Miranda decision. We can refuse some cooperation, and insist on having access to a lawyer. "In the case of Miranda versus Arizona, in 1966, the Court ruled that, before questioning by the police, suspects must be informed that they have the right to remain silent and the right to consult an attorney, and that anything they say may be used against them in court." Let's ask the clerk if he regrets calling the police. "Store owner Mahmoud Abumayyaleh says he regrets the 911 call one of his employees made on George Floyd." ' Store owner Mahmoud Abumayyaleh has told multiple news outlets if he were at the store he would not have called police, a practice he is respected in the community for adhering to. “We don't call the police when counterfeit money is handed to us,” store owner Mahmoud Abumayyaleh told NPR Tuesday. “We teach the clerks to let one of the owners know. And we deal with it directly and tell the patron that he can, you know, give us the money, or the authorities can be called.” ' Whether he knew they were counterfeit is an issue for a court to decide. If police officers could make such decisions on a sidewalk there would be no need for judges. What the store owner told NPR after the fact is irrelevant. In actuality they did call the police or they would not have been there. In fact, I believe there is video of the clerk following Floyd to his car before police arrive. Of course a year and a half later everyone regrets what happened and wants to minimize what part they played. In my opinion, that’s what Chauvin did. He appointed himself judge and jury. Kirk, after reading your posts for several years it is obvious to me that your career has been in the law. Whether enforcement or the judicial side does not matter. I respect your opinion however, in this case, Chauvin committed first degree murder in my opinion. He overstepped his authority in so many ways. He’s lucky that that was not what he was charged with. The picture of him kneeling on Floyd, hands in pocket and smiling showed me all that I needed to know.
|
|
|
Post by lowell on Apr 20, 2021 20:42:32 GMT -6
9 minutes 29 seconds. He wanted to be sure Floyd was dead. Ir was clearly murder by cop. I agree with Garak that it was first degree murder. There is no need for a judge and jury to determine whether Floyd violated the law or how many laws he violated. The police in this case made sure that a judge and jury were unnecessary to determine whether Floyd was knowingly passing counterfeit money. The death sentence is too often a choice taken by police, and by gun owners.
Chauvin committed the gravest of sins. He will live long and comfortably in prison and then when he dies of natural causes he will spend a near eternity in the Real Hell.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2021 6:53:03 GMT -6
Chauvin will never stay in prison very long. He will be pardoned. When he's in prison he will be treated like royalty. He will remain in protective custody and eat the fruit of the land.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2021 7:21:48 GMT -6
Chauvin will never stay in prison very long. He will be pardoned. When he's in prison he will be treated like royalty. He will remain in protective custody and eat the fruit of the land. After he is releast he will write more than one book and be looked on as a hero, to the chagrin of many.
|
|
|
Post by garak on Apr 21, 2021 7:24:53 GMT -6
Chauvin will never stay in prison very long. He will be pardoned. When he's in prison he will be treated like royalty. He will remain in protective custody and eat the fruit of the land. After he is releast he will write more than one book and be looked on as a hero, to the chagrin of many. Who will pardon him? Please enlighten us.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2021 10:15:14 GMT -6
If I'm signed in I can't see what you guys have posted, If I'm just viewing the board as a guest I can.
Trump will pardon him. It's what he said.
|
|
|
Post by garak on Apr 21, 2021 10:50:20 GMT -6
If I'm signed in I can't see what you guys have posted, If I'm just viewing the board as a guest I can. Trump will pardon him. It's what he said. Trump can no longer pardon anyone. He is not the president anymore. 🙄
|
|