Four Minneapolis officers fired after death of black man part II

[Kutnupe14]

The Mama June types?

In the northern, houses built around trailers, part of the state yes. In the southern... eastern portion, those gals are nothing but hot.

 

[BugI02]

You know that nobody in their right mind will answer that question truthfully. Well, I'd say that nobody would search themselves for what they unconscious bias is. There's a reason I call my end of town "Vanilla Village". A white guy can sit at the community pond fishing all day without a sideways glance. But black man? I guarantee this HOA vice president is going to hear about it.

As you know, I live in a pretty well-heeled community, but it is also a multi-racial and multi-ethnic community. Why I bought where i did had nothing to do with demographics (except maybe financial). I valued having our own police and fire, from a quality of service standpoint, and award-winning schools from a preservation of property values standpoint - but what I really was looking for was just people a lot like me from the standpoint of how good a neighbor they were willing to be. I wanted a place where people maintained their houses and infringed as little on their neighbor's enjoyment with noise or boisterousness. It really doesn't matter one whit to me what their ethnicity or religion is as long as we have some overlap in attitude of what constitutes the good life. UA has some very strong codes and laws to backstop any desire to not be annoyed by your neighbors, but you might be surprised at how seldom they actually need to be invoked

But because I sought out a neighborhood I could be a part of and enjoy, that happened to have a certain economic demographic. I was not searching for a lily-white neighborhood nor a country-clubbish one. I was searching for the most idyllic one available to me without changing metro areas. Some will damn me as racist or elitist (or both) and that's fine; only I, among men, know my own heart

 

[Kutnupe14]

Cause of death was not proven beyond reasonable doubt. The "assault" was not proven beyond reasonable doubt. Depraved mind was not proven beyond reasonable doubt.

Manslaughter 2? Yes.

Obviously 12 "intimidated" people disagree. Next people will be telling me Dominion had something do with this.

 

[jamil]

I think somewhere between minutes 4 and 5, it became beyond a reasonable doubt, depraved indifference to human life... Murder 3.

One could argue that it took a depraved mind to keep him there after it became obvious he was not conscious. But it still requires that Chauvin caused Floyd's death. I don't think that was proven beyond reasonable doubt.

 

[jamil]

Obviously 12 "intimidated" people disagree. Next people will be telling me Dominion had something do with this.

That's nonsense. And you know it.

And your facile response is facile.

 

[BugI02]

PS - If I wasn't already strongly linked to you in some INGOers' minds, I'd be irked that you 'liked' my post.

I see the smiley, but I hope that was meant to be in purple, too

Kut will like or dislike any of our posts based on his view of the merits. Although I don't expect to experience that very often, no one would mistakenly believe that Kut could be moved by pandering or prevarication. If Kut likes your post, then he sees it as genuine and correct from his point of view, and no shame should attach. Homey don't play that

 

[Kutnupe14]

I see the smiley, but I hope that was meant to be in purple, too

Kut will like or dislike any of our posts based on his view of the merits. Although I don't expect to experience that very often, no one would mistakenly believe that Kut could be moved by pandering or prevarication. If Kut likes your post, then he sees it as genuine and correct from his point of view, and no shame should attach. Homey don't play that

I feel kinda bad in liking this post.

 

[jamil]

I see the smiley, but I hope that was meant to be in purple, too

Kut will like or dislike any of our posts based on his view of the merits. Although I don't expect to experience that very often, no one would mistakenly believe that Kut could be moved by pandering or prevarication. If Kut likes your post, then he sees it as genuine and correct from his point of view, and no shame should attach. Homey don't play that

That's probably true.

 

[jamil]

I feel kinda bad in liking this post.

Oh, he's a goner on INGO for sure now.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

One could argue that it took a depraved mind to keep him there after it became obvious he was not conscious. But it still requires that Chauvin caused Floyd's death. I don't think that was proven beyond reasonable doubt.

But that's the same "caused the death of..." element in manslaughter:

Second Element: The Defendant caused the death of George Floyd, by culpable negligence, whereby the Defendant created an unreasonable risk and consciously took chance of causing death or great bodily harm. “Culpable negligence” is intentional conduct that the Defendant may not have intended to be harmful but that an ordinary and reasonably prudent person would recognize as involving strong probability ofinjury to others.

 

[BugI02]

Person #1: "What do you want revealed at the trial?"
Person #2: "The Truth"
Person #1: I refuse to accept that response. Answer the question the way I want it answered.

Person #2's response is so vague and non-specific as to be essentially meaningless. He might as well have said 'world peace'

Edit: Or, better yet 'Truth, justice and the American Way'

 

[BugI02]

I'm with you there. Butterscotch was a staple of my church going youth as well.

I like turtles butterscotch

 

[buckwacker]

Dang it

Oh, he's a goner on INGO for sure now.

Dang it Kut, two in one day.

 

[jamil]

But that's the same "caused the death of..." element in manslaughter:

No. It's not the same standard for causing death. As it reads to me, it sounds like Chauvin's kneeling on Floyd would have to have been the cause of death for both M2 and M3. That wasn't proven beyond reasonable doubt.

For manslaughter, the death must be by culpable negligence. And I think that fits exactly. The defense expert was very convincing of that when he said that there was a point where Floyd wasn't beyond saving, and the prosecution was able to tease it out of him that the point of saving him would have been right after he passed out. And maybe Chauvin didn't have the skills. Certainly keeping him restrained prevented anyone from saving him.

The death element required in MS2.
"The Defendant caused the death of George Floyd, by culpable negligence, whereby the Defendant created an unreasonable risk and consciously took a chance of causing death or great bodily harm.“Culpable negligence” is intentional conduct that the Defendant may not have intended to beharmful but that an ordinary and reasonably prudent person would recognize as involving a strong probability of injury to others."

Compared to the death element required in M3

"The Defendant caused the death of George Floyd by an intentional act that was eminently dangerous to Other persons. A person commits an act eminently dangerous to others whent he act is highly likely to cause death."

 

[jamil]

I like butterscotch. But. I try to stay away from hard candy these days, or really any really sweet sweets.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

No. It's not the same standard for causing death. As it reads to me, it sounds like Chauvin's kneeling on Floyd would have to have been the cause of death for both M2 and M3. That wasn't proven beyond reasonable doubt.

For manslaughter, the death must be by culpable negligence. And I think that fits exactly. The defense expert was very convincing of that when he said that there was a point where Floyd wasn't beyond saving, and the prosecution was able to tease it out of him that the point of saving him would have been right after he passed out. And maybe Chauvin didn't have the skills. Certainly keeping him restrained prevented anyone from saving him.

The death element required in MS2.
"The Defendant caused the death of George Floyd, by culpable negligence, whereby the Defendant created an unreasonable risk and consciously took a chance of causing death or great bodily harm.“Culpable negligence” is intentional conduct that the Defendant may not have intended to beharmful but that an ordinary and reasonably prudent person would recognize as involving a strong probability of injury to others."

Compared to the death element required in M3

"The Defendant caused the death of George Floyd by an intentional act that was eminently dangerous to Other persons. A person commits an act eminently dangerous to others whent he act is highly likely to cause death."

Ok, I got you... your argument is that he "caused the death" by preventing life saving measures... and, I'll add, measures that were called for by the dept. training, therefore negligence.

I took the more direct route... holding him down caused Floyd's death, although via fragile "eggshell" due to his overall condition.

 

[jamil]

Ok, I got you... your argument is that he "caused the death" by preventing life saving measures... and, I'll add, measures that were called for by the dept. training, therefore negligence.

I took the more direct route... holding him down caused Floyd's death, although via fragile "eggshell" due to his overall condition.

But the prosecution argued that all of that involved in the fragile eggshell was ********. Drug amount was negligible, heart issue was very minor, it was all inconsequential. You’d have to believe the prosecution was full of **** to go for the eggshell stuff. But, I’ll grant you that it could be M3 because of that. I think reasonable people might disagree. There is a reasonable doubt about the cause of death though. I don’t think there is with MS2 because he could have been saved and Chauvin prevented that through what I think was an unreasonable mistake. Definitely negligence was proven beyond reasonable doubt.

M2 and probably M3 is off the table in my thinking if MS3 is proven. If they believe the type of restraint was the cause of death, it’s straight up M2, or possibly M3, and not simply negligence.

 

[JettaKnight]

I like butterscotch. But. I try to stay away from hard candy these days, or really any really sweet sweets.

I always carry Werthers in the pocket of my cardigan; you know, "to complete the look."

My wife is now like Pavlov's dog - she sees me in a cardigan and immediately shoves out an open hand.

 

[kickbacked]

Not always. For example, when in college I spent most of my social time with the Catholic campus ministry (while being non-Catholic) just because it was a fun and pleasant group of people who saw the brighter side of life and didn't see denominational differences as battle lines.

Some day I do hope to sit down with T.Lex, so...

Just a joke. Not all catholics are nuns breaking rulers across you, and not all protestants are way too excited to be up early on a Sunday.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Just a joke. Not all catholics are nuns breaking rulers across you, and not all protestants are way too excited to be up early on a Sunday.

Indeed a joke but you did bring back some pleasant memories!