« Hype | Main | The New World »

April 19, 2021

Comments

When authorities are faced with the blowback from public exposure of police misfeasance and are forced to charge police officer(s), they tend to overcharge to show just how serious they're taking it. Then it only takes one juror to think, "This guy is guilty of something, but he's not guilty of this."

Charles, that's probably why he is charged with second-degree unintentional murder, third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter. Nobody expects him to be found guilty of all of them. But it gives the jury some flexibility in what they find him guilty of.

Also looks like the defense is aiming for mistrial and the judge seems to be signaling sympathies for that. In any case the talking points are already prepared that the result will have had nothing to do with the facts of the case but only with the public pressure outside the courthouse. So, if found guilty, Chauvin is the innocent lamb thrown to the wolves in misguided attempts at appeasement. If found innocent (or presumed innocent), his non-guilt was so obvious and the jurors so heroic that they stood up to the bloodthirsty mob. If a mistrial is declared, it was an emergency brake that had to be employed to save the innocent lamb from the cowardly jurors that were in danger of bowing to the pressure of the mob.

cop tried for killing someone?

cop walks.

we've heard this story a thousand times.

people will protest this predictable outcome.

other people will find racist reasons to complain about the protestors.

Not thousands, less than 100 in the last 30 years, if not less. The number of black men shot is roughly the same as the number of white men, and both demographics have roughly the same number of encounters with the police nationally and on a annual basis.

That said, if the jury is doing its job, it has to follow the law and, if there is a reasonable doubt, acquit. That's the law for everyone. Both sides had compelling medical witnesses, less so on their "use of force" experts.

Floyd had potentially fatal level of fentanyl in his system. There is competent medical evidence that the fentanyl caused his death and that, but for the fentanyl, he would not have died. If that evidence is credible and the reports I've read indicate that is the case, then the jury would be well within its rights to acquit.

I'm one of the few lawyers I know who has tried a case with a lot of pretrial and trial publicity. The media and the blogosphere missed pretty much everything by a mile, so it is likely if not certain there is lot most of us are not seeing or hearing.

I'm not particularly warm about insisting on a conviction or being unwilling to accept an acquittal. A trial that is a foregone conclusion is no trial at all.

Both sides had compelling medical witnesses, less so on their "use of force" experts.

How "compelling" the various medical witnesses were is not exactly cut and dried.

And, as you alude to, the testimony from various police officials regarding how far Chauvin was from standard practice, was pretty damning.

That is not how the judge directed the jury, McKinney.
“The fact that other causes contributed to death does not relieve the defendant of criminal liability.”

The number of black men shot is roughly the same as the number of white men

you forgot to divide by the size of the respective populations.

both demographics have roughly the same number of encounters with the police nationally and on a annual basis.

define 'encounter'.

for traffic stops, the most common way people encounter the police, it's higher for black people:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-020-0858-1

Relative to their share of the residential population, we found that black drivers were, on average, stopped more often than white drivers. In particular, among state patrol stops, the annual per-capita stop rate for black drivers was 0.10 compared to 0.07 for white drivers; and among municipal police stops, the annual per-capita stop rate for black drivers was 0.20 compared to 0.14 for white drivers. For Hispanic drivers, however, we found that stop rates were lower than for white drivers: 0.05 for stops conducted by state patrol (compared to 0.07 for white drivers) and 0.09 for those conducted by municipal police departments (compared to 0.14 for white drivers). In all cases, these numbers are the unweighted average annual per-capita stop rates across the states and cities we analysed, and all estimates have corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) with radius <0.001. We note that these results are consistent with self-reported stop rates by white, black and Hispanic drivers who participated in the national PPCS1.

also:

Black Americans are 3.23 times more likely than white Americans to be killed by police

they keep telling you something's wrong. you keep telling them they're wrong.

Yes. Typical instruction. Not the same as the fentanyl being a cause of death without which death would not have occurred.

From what I've read, a series of prosecution expert witnesses testified that fentanyl was not the cause of death. The defence expert said the cause of death was unclear. No expert said that fentanyl was the likely cause of death.

Be that as it may, my understanding is that the manslaughter charge does not require the cause of death to be proved.

That would require the fentanyl to be the proximate, as opposed to contributory cause of death, though, would it not ?
(And, FWIW, from the evidence I've seen, that hasn't been demonstrated.)

Am I correct in thinking that the judge's instruction means that if the knee on the neck was also a cause of death without which death would not have occurred, then the officer is legally liable for the death ?

I’m on my iPhone. Will try to respond later.

Thanks, McKinney.
Got to be elsewhere for a while, too.

Anybody who claims that it was the drugs or the carbon-monoxide that killed George Floyd is invited to have have someone kneel on their non-drugged, non-CO-inhaling neck for 9.5 minutes and THEN tell us that it's no big deal.

Bet there are no takers for that one.

Hannity would, but he's still in line for his waterboarding.

I think these are the charges:

Second-degree murder

Definition: Under Minnesota law, a person *causing the death* of another person, without intent to cause the death of any person, while committing or attempting to commit a felony offense is guilty of the crime of Murder in the Second Degree.

Third-degree murder

Definition: Under Minnesota law, a person *causing the death of another* by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life, but without intent to cause the death of any person, is guilty of Murder in the Third Degree.

Second-degree manslaughter

Definition: Under Minnesota law, whoever, by culpable negligence, whereby he creates an unreasonable risk and consciously takes the chance of causing death or great bodily harm to another person, *causes the death* of another is guilty of Manslaughter in the Second Degree.

I am fully aware that the overwhelming majority of the commentariat believes the evidence is overwhelming and a guilty verdict on at least one of the charges is the only reasonable outcome.

I put the mens rea requirement in bold for each of the charges and then I put asterisks around the causation element. "Causation" is an essential element of the offense that the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

I am reasonably confident that Minnesota follows most common-law jurisdictions and recognizes that legal causation means cause-in-fact. "Proximate cause" means a cause or an outcome that is reasonably foreseeable. Juries are almost always instructed that there can be more than one cause of an event. It is not clear to me whether this jury was given a "sole cause" instruction, but the defense attorney – – if he is doing his job – – will argue that the sole cause of Mr. Floyd's death probably was, or certainly could have been, the combination of his poor health and the fentanyl. The jury does not have to believe this to be true fact in order to convict. The jury simply has to believe that it is reasonably possible that the "sole cause" of Mr. Floyd's death was as stated. I would be surprised if Chauvin is acquitted, but not shocked.

A jury that does its job is driven by the evidence and the law, and this being a criminal case, any reasonable doubt as to any element of any of the charges means the jury MUST acquit. A jury, under American Jurisprudence does not have the option of convicting if the jury has a reasonable doubt. The jury is instructed that it must acquit if there is a reasonable doubt.

Is it irrelevant that Derek and George knew each other previously? They worked for the same club and it seems to me they should of been on a first name basis, but George never call Derek anything but Sir. This killing strikes me as personal.

Based on those descriptions, my ignorant opinion is the second-degree manslaughter charge seems the likeliest for any conviction. Not saying that conviction is "likely".

kneeling on a guy's neck for nine minutes, even after the guy has passed out, seems pretty eminently dangerous and depraved, to me.

Chauvin will be a celebrated guest on Fox when this is over.

Chauvin will be a celebrated guest on Fox when this is over.

Probably true. How infinitely depressing (despite being so very unsurprising).

Is there a legal definition of a "depraved mind"? That would seem to be the critical issue for 3rd degree murder.

My sense is that Chauvin didn't so much intend to kill Floyd. More like, he was utterly indifferent to the possibility of Floyd dying as a result of his actions. But then, I'm not on the jury.

Chauvin will be a celebrated guest on Fox when this is over.

Although, if he's convicted, there's a good chance that the outrage machine will have moved on by the time he is out of prison and available for a Fox gig.

Jury has reached a verdict, will be announced in the next half-hour or so.

More like, he was utterly indifferent to the possibility of Floyd dying as a result of his actions.

bystanders were telling Chauvin to stop. paramedics were there, telling him to stop, for at least a minute and a half. that seems like more than indifference. that seems like determination.

hang him. metaphorically, if need be.

that seems like more than indifference. that seems like determination.

Perhaps. But it might have been determination to show that he was the macho man in charge, and nobody else could tell him what to do. With what they were telling him to do, why, and the consequences of not doing it all irrelevant.

What you are describing would be 2nd degree murder (not manslaughter) -- which wasn't charged:
causes the death of a human being with intent to effect the death of that person or another, but without premeditation

wj, according to McKinney above (although he didn't seem completely sure), 2nd degree murder was one of the charges. Is this wrong?

GftNC, TPM says the charges were second-degree unintentional murder, third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter.

Thanks, Michael Cain.

GftNC: What McKinney posted is one of the definitions of 2nd degree murder. But my mind missed it, because I am not aware that Chauvin was committing another felony at the time. Oops. Guess they could find that after all, under the part of the definition I posted.

Thanks for catching that.

And then Michael finds another detail that I missed.

Oh well, an a few minutes we'll know what the jury did.

Thank God. And unprecedented in the state of Minnesota.

And remanded into custody. Excellent.

Next the appeals.

my gob is smacked.

guilty on all counts.

He knelt on a guy's neck for almost ten minutes, while the guy was telling him he couldn't breathe and pleading for relief.

He had his trial, the jury went out for 10 hours, and they apparently found the prosecution's case persuasive. So be it.

I didn't follow the trial, didn't watch the video because I'm not interested in watching a man die. I have no real opinion about and frankly little interest in Chauvin's state of mind. I don't really care if Floyd was high as a kite, and I don't really care if he had underlying conditions. If you are being arrested or restrained by police, the police have a basic duty of care toward you. Ignoring obvious indications of distress is, IMO, not excusable.

Cops need to stop killing black people in the numbers that they do, and they need to be circumspect in when and how they decide to apply force. They aren't a fucking occupying army, they're public servants.

Protect and serve. Right?

Maybe it will begin to sink in, maybe it won't. I guess we'll see.

Maybe it will begin to sink in, maybe it won't. I guess we'll see.

It's a start, anyway.

What cleek said.

I had gone to town for an appointment, a bit of shopping, and some picture-taking. I got in the car to come home, got tired of the music I'd been listening to, and turned on NPR at the immediate moment when the judge was reading the verdict.

I guess I didn't expect it to go down this way, because I cried all the way home. With what proportion of relief, grief, and foreboding I cannot say.

*****

Protect and serve my eye.

Do they get no training whatsoever in taking a moment to try to figure out whether a little (literally; the arrest report say she's 5 feet tall and weighs 100 pounds) old lady who's responding weirdly might be deaf or impaired?

All over this: Employees at Wal-Mart "said she tried to shoplift." How tall do we think the cop is, based on how much she has to crane her neck when she finally responds to him?

I know, it could have been worse. She could have been Black, and dead.

It's a start, anyway.

Colorado, Connecticut, New Mexico, and NYC have all limited qualified immunity to some degree. More chinks in the wall, even if small.

We moved last fall, for the first time in 32 years (granddaughters). I've been slowly digging through things in my new city and county (same state). The other day I was working through the state's database on police shootings where a non-officer was killed. I live in the larger city in the county (pop 180,000). In the last three years there has been one such shooting, by the first officer arriving in response to an active-shooter call. There were a half-dozen neighborhood witnesses who all said, "The guy was nuts, and he shot at the officer first." In the county's other sizable city (pop 80,000), police shootings seem to be a routine every-several-months thing.

From a friend on social media:

Part of the problem here is why we are SO relieved. We don’t trust our justice system to be just.

That’s a huge problem.

Michael Cain - I have grave concerns about your county sheriff. I've seen a lot of his press releases via local relatives and he seems to be using a lot of language I associate with the Constitutional Sheriffs Movement, mostly in response to things that Polis has ordered.

If any of the limitations require cooperation from the Sheriff's Office, I'd expect not just resistance, but outright refusal.

Protect and serve my eye.

This happened in the second smaller city that I mentioned, a dozen miles down the road from me, where police shooting people has been a regular occurrence. Animosity there is not aimed at Blacks, who are a vanishing small portion of the population. Minority groups, in order, are Hispanic, Asian, Native American, and finally Black. Don't let them hear you speaking fluent Spanish.

I had been assuming that the 3 charges were alternatives for the jury to pick from. McKinney (or any other lawyers here), is a guilty verdict on all three counts usual in this situation? Or were the jurors "throwing the book at him"? Or what?

Music:

russell probably knows this one; there are probably better versions, but this is nice because it's a pandemic rendition.

and

This was one of my go-to selections when I felt gloomy last fall.

wj -- I'm not a lawyer, but "guilty on all counts" is a familiar phrase, FWIW.

Janie, I'm familiar with the phrase. It's just it's associated in my mind with something like charges for armed robbery and assault and homocide and reckless driving on the getaway (and maybe mopery and dopery of the spaceways) etc. That is, a bunch of different in kind offenses during the same event. Whereas this seemed, to my amateur eye, like a collection of different levels of a single kind offense (homocide).

Chris Rock has noted that there are some jobs where we really can't afford a few bad apples.

Airline pilot, brain surgeon. And he suggests adding cops to the list. That makes sense to me.

Police have license to use force, including deadly force, when that is required. It is, and should be considered to be, an enormous responsibility. And IMO they should be held to a very high standard.

Stuff like this makes life that much harder for every good cop. And there are lots and lots of them, but people like Chauvin make them harder to see.

I sincerely hope that this marks some kind of turning point for how we think about policing in this country. No idea if that will happen or not, but maybe it will.

Janie, thanks for We'll Build A Land, one of the UU national anthems. I think my church may have had Zoom church with that congregation sometime over the last year!

Can someone be convicted on three different charges for the same act? I thought the point of the three charges was so the jury could decide which to apply.

Also there's a discussion on Balloon Juice on the difference between justice being served or accountability being achieved. The feeling seems to be that this is more of an accountability moment than a justice one but I suppose it all comes down to what connotations you put on the words. In any case I hope it is notice that abuse of the vulnerable is not going to be tolerated. Who the vulnerable are will vary from place to place. Living while Native or Spanish speaking can be very hazardous too.

One last comment: I was reading a discussion amongst Facebook friends. One of the commenters said that if Chauvan wasn't convicted the "savages" who "just want free things" would loot and riot. And guess what! newsmax has a headline about savages who want free things.

That savages who want free things has been a racist meme for God alone knows how long but the people who use that phrase will scream blue murder if you point out how racist they are.

I read something at the beginning of this that I cannot find, so I'm wondering if I imagined it or if I am confusing it with another case, but I thought I heard that there were initially some charges that were made and these charges were increased and for the initial charges, Chauvin wanted to plead guilty but was dissuaded from doing so. Anyone read anything like that?

lj, I do vaguely remember something about charges being upgraded (so to speak) -- I remember being relieved and a bit surprised that it was being taken that seriously.

I don't remember the bit about him wanting to plead guilty but being dissuaded, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen.

This article might explain a number of things -- but I didn't actually read it so I'm not sure.

It's not that uncommon for initial charges to be basically a "holding" justification, while the DA considers what actual (more serious) charges to file. Not unjustified, but less serious and perhaps more unarguable.

A guilty plea to those initial charges would be an attempt to preempt the more serious charges -- especially, as in this case, the defense knows they're in serious jeopardy from more serious charges. And the DA might well decide not to cooperate, even if the defendant's lawyer convinces him to try.

It will also be interesting to see how the trials go for the other three officers at the scene. Convictions there (and I have no idea how likely that is) might be a blow against the "blue wall of silence."

About the blue wall of silence==the other cops or at least some of them were new and under Chauven supervision==he was training them! So I wonder how that is going to play out from a legal point of view. I believe nurses are under a legal obligation to object if a doctor does something wrong. "The doctor told me to do it" is not an excuse. But in a system that rarely holds a cop accountable I doubt if the cops who were new and under Chavan's supervision felt that they had much responsibility for interfering--or any authority to do so. It would really go against cop culture. Witness that lady cop who got fired when she make another cop release a chock hold And she sued and only got her pension back after thriteen years of legal action!

BTW Columbus ohio police just shot and killed a sixteen year old girl. There's already two versions of events. This is the department that allowed one of their several helicopters to (at great expense)fly over a black neighborhood and write CPD in the air. A neighbor of the dead teen said, "Don't call the police. Call your dad. Call your grandmother. Don't call the police or suddenly you are dead."

https://www.mediamatters.org/tucker-carlson/tucker-carlson-has-complete-meltdown-and-ends-segment-when-guest-says-convicted

White supremacist vermin.

All Republican, all conservative, all the time.

I'm working on (with no promises of finishing) a post about Asian American stuff, but I'd just highlight here that there are two threads here. The first is that one of the (trainee? Haven't heard any definitive info on that) police officers was Tou Thao, a Hmong American (there is a large Hmong population in that area).
https://www.vox.com/first-person/2020/6/3/21279156/george-floyd-protests-police-brutality-tou-thao-asian-americans

The second is that Chauvin's wife was also Asian American, which led to a separate backlash
https://news.yahoo.com/backlash-against-asian-american-woman-121950813.html

About Chavan's exwife. It is astonishing to me that so many people felt empowered to publicly state their analysis of her marriage when they literally knew nothing about her except that she was Hmong.

One of the commenters said that if Chauvan wasn't convicted the "savages" who "just want free things" would loot and riot. And guess what! newsmax has a headline about savages who want free things.

Newsmax? pshaw.

ladies and gentlemen, the media arm of the GOP's latest top draw:

“The jurors in the Derek Chauvin trial came to a unanimous and unequivocal verdict this afternoon: ‘Please don’t hurt us,’” Carlson said on “Tucker Carlson Tonight.”

Carlson added, “Everyone understood perfectly well the consequences of an acquittal in this case. After nearly a year of burning and looting and murder by BLM, that was never in doubt.”

wonkie : Can someone be convicted on three different charges for the same act? I thought the point of the three charges was so the jury could decide which to apply.

Different jurisdictions handle this differently on the jury verdict form, but we are dealing with the concept of lesser included offenses. Chauvin will be sentenced on only the most serious of the guilty verdicts, but you go ahead and find guilt on the lesser offenses for purposes of appeal. An appellate court can find reversible error on a more serious guilty verdict but still uphold verdicts on the lesser offenses.

Huh, very enlightening PdM, thank you.

No one more right wing guy than Grady Judd but:

Polk County Sheriff Grady Judd in a statement to News Channel 8 said:

“As I said at the time the video and facts came to light, had Mr. Chauvin done in Polk County what he did in Minneapolis, he would have been fired and arrested that night. Chauvin has had his day in court and he has been found guilty. That is our justice system at work. It’s not alright to violate the law. The jury has spoken. Chauvin is being held accountable, and that is a good thing,” Polk County Sheriff Grady Judd.

However, this is also true:

"Carlson added, “Everyone understood perfectly well the consequences of an acquittal in this case. After nearly a year of burning and looting and murder by BLM, that was never in doubt.”"

Progress is in the mind of the beholder. No matter what the consequence, the jury found this guy guilty as it should. In several other cases the jury did not, also likely correctly. The next cop, last night, shot a girl for trying to stab another girl. After repeated warnings.

The question is will that require a guilty verdict to prevent riots? Where does the line get drawn? Or are cops just going to get crucified no matter the circumstance? Can we actually admit that some of these uses of force are justified? Or do we just celebrate when any cop goes to jail?

It's still a long road.

I have grave concerns about your county sheriff.

Fair point. He's term limited out at the next election. The voter make up of the county has changed dramatically over the decade since he was first elected. Voter registrations then (in thousands): 52R, 39D 40I. Today (also in thousands): 69R, 70D, 113I. (Yes, the number of voters has almost doubled in ten years.) As the Republican incumbents on the county commission have been term-limited out, they've all been replaced by Democrats. In the Fort Collins city council elections held earlier this month, the candidates were all running on "I'm more progressive than my opponent." The only member still on the council who is not a self-proclaimed progressive is the one who didn't have to run this time.

Assuming Colorado gets an eighth House seat, the redistricting along the Front Range is going to be very interesting.

It's still a long road.

Indeed it is. It's a road we've been traveling on for 400 years, and when we finally realize that black wealth and power necessarily needs to approximate that of white wealth and power, then, and only then, will be able to end this inhumane journey.

the media arm of the GOP's latest top draw

lol. i could not have come up with a worse phrase if i tried.

Exactly how many people were murdered by BLM protesters? And how many does one need to qualify for a* 'year of x, y and murder'?
[we can discuss looting an burning later, once this part is cleared up]

*or 'nearly a'

Carlson's malignant proximity to truth does to truth what the Covid-19 virus is now doing to wanna-be assassin and liar Ted Nugent's diseased immune system, trying to kill it ... as a public service.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/04/adam-serwer-there-will-be-more-derek-chauvins/618659/

In both cases, it is both truth and the Covid-19 virus that should be wearing masks and being vaccinated to protect themselves against the Carlson/Nugent infection.

@Hartmut -- well, there's Kyle Rittenhouse....

At the age of 17 he took a gun to Wisconsin illegally, strutted down the street like the action movie hero he thought he was, and killed two people.

Oh, wait....

Hartmut, honestly I was focused on looting and burning. I am not aware of anyone BLM murdered.

And, Bobby, IMO that may be the least well thought out thing you ever wrote. In a one person one vote country that will simply not happen as white power slowly is replaced by Latinx power as the demographics will likely never favor the black community.

The black communities electoral influence today is based on the fact they are a near unanimous Democratic voting block in blue states. That is likely to change over time as the economics changes their priorities.

The wealth gap is part and parcel of that power dynamic.

BLM did not burn and loot. People burned and looted in the vicinity of BLM protests. If someone burns and loots in the vicinity of a gay rights protest that I'm participating in, that is not me. But it's convenient and expedient for malevolent liars who like Tucker Carlson, who makes fame and fortune out of hatred, to conflate the two. I don't know what everyone else who does this uses for an excuse.

Meanwhile I'm sure the usual suspects will be whitewashing the police, despite reports like this one.

malevolent liars who like Tucker Carlson

Marty, it was not you who came up with 'murder' and afaict you said nothing to even imply that.

"Or do we just celebrate when any cop goes to jail?"

Diversionary rubbish.

No, just the ones convicted for their crimes by a jury of their peers.

https://thecrimereport.org/2019/01/31/u-s-cops-make-an-arrest-every-three-seconds-new-study-finds/

350 million plus Americans. More than three million police officers. An arrest every three seconds, every day, every week, every year.

This in a country where roughly half of this supposedly conservative country wholesale condemns government action, influence, regulation, and budgets non-stop round the clock, except when they are celebrating the police state features and shows of force of and by government, and, to boot, dressing up in fatigues and arming themselves to the teeth to ostensibly augment the government's point-of-sale brute force.

It is a tragedy without a laugh track.

malevolent liars like Tucker Carlson

Malevolent, flagrantly white-supremacist liars like Tucker Carlson....

"BLM" = Change The Subject!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If someone burns and loots in the vicinity of a gay rights protest that I'm participating in, that is not me.

in FL you can now go to jail if someone else does that.

“The problem with this bill is that the language is so overbroad and vague ... that it captures anybody who is peacefully protesting at a protest that turns violent through no fault of their own,” said Kara Gross, the legislative director at ACLU Florida. “Those individuals who do not engage in any violent conduct under this bill can be arrested and charged with a third-degree felony and face up to five years in prison and loss of voting rights. The whole point of this is to instill fear in Floridians.”

so conservative. much respect for the Constitution.

Or do we just celebrate when any cop goes to jail?

No, just the ones convicted for their crimes by a jury of their peers.

And we sure as hell mourn and protest when a cop goes unaccountably free in the face of plenty of evidence that they needlessly murdered a black person (or in fact anyone).

"Or do we just celebrate when any cop goes to jail?"

yes?

if a cop goes to jail that means he broke the fucking law.

"conservatives" are such bootlickers

People loot and riot when their favorite hockey team wins, or at least when the favorite hockey team of lots of people around them wins. Large, unplanned disruptions in the usual order sometimes result in vandalism, looting, rioting, arson, etc. No reasonable person thinks those are good things, though sometimes they do force progress against powerful opposition when a political impetus is involved. (I doubt there is ever forced progress after riots over sports.)

If you don't like political riots, or at least riots precipitated by political protests, maybe listen to the people who are upset and seriously consider their grievances, even if they can't afford to hire armies of lawyers, before things get to the point of rioting.

This isn't an attempt to justify riots. It's an attempt to at least start to find a way to prevent them, because they aren't good. Like any consideration of the causes of a given social problem in an attempt to prevent that social problem, this one may be characterized as making excuses for people who do things that are generally considered to be wrong.

What do the people want? Compare the millions of people who protested racial injustice over the last year to the much smaller number of people who rioted, including the ones at the capitol on 1/6/21.

What did the people who participated in the 2017 Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville want?

Who has reasonable demands?

I take the side of this cop regarding this verdict:

https://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2021/04/white-power-hour-goes-anti-anti-chauvin

I already posted that interview yesterday, but it bears celebrating that guest's ... a veteran police officer with hundreds of forceful encounters with suspects in his career .... willingness to appear on Carlson's hate fest without committing police violence against racist, fascist Carlson.

I admire the former's restraint. He didn't even tase that smarmy, giggling get.

My knee seeks Carlson's neck.

I also take the side of the Minneapolis Chief of Police who testified for the prosecution in the trial.

Someone call me anti-cop.

I dare ya.

https://digbysblog.net/2021/04/truth-decay-revisited/

I hope the deep police states around the world finally close in on this master criminal, for whom sub-boy Carlson is merely a cackling piece of Strother Martin prairie scum, who could use another kick in the teeth:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mejzuQ9kVbs

Someone call me anti-cop.

I dare ya.

Are you not one of the people expressing glee over all the wrongful murder convictions of police officers Marty has conjured up in his vivid imagination?

I never mentioned one wrongful conviction. Fucking pay attention. If you don't grasp the difference between months of rioting over Michael Brown and the price the cop paid and a clear case in the George Floyd case then this won't ever be solved, progress won't be made.

Thank you Pollo de Muerte for answering my question upthread. It makes sense now.

Or do we just celebrate when any cop goes to jail?

So this was meant only to apply to rightful convictions? Well, then ... yeah, at least to the extent that anyone can celebrate criminal convictions while preferring that the crime weren't committed in the first place.

I admit to cheering the convictions of the corrupt New York City cops depicted in the movie "Serpico".

I also confess to a bit of a thrill up the leg when Sterling Hayden, playing the corrupt cop, McCloskey, gets one in the noggin in Godfather II before he can tuck in to his rigatoni.

Al Pacino has done more on screen to punish police corruption than Black Lives Matter has ever tried on Eastwood's trigger happy Dirty Harry, the object of celebratory conservative huzzahs to this day.

nooneithink had second thinks.

Having fired .44 magnum revolvers without ear protection, I've always wondered how Dirty Harry had any hearing left...

Large, unplanned disruptions in the usual order sometimes result in vandalism, looting, rioting, arson, etc.

Typically (in my admittedly limited experience) disruptions can result in vandalism, sometimes involving some of the original protesters, celebrators, etc. But the looting, arson, etc. seem to routinely be done by folks who weren't involved,** just seizing the opportunity. What the racial makeup of those looters, etc. is depends on the demographics of the area where the disruption was. Not a lot of people traveling any distance to loot.

** And who could care less about the cause of the disruption.

The next cop, last night, shot a girl for trying to stab another girl. After repeated warnings.

***

A 15 year old Black girl called the police because she was about to get jumped at her home. She had a knife. She was shot four times and killed by @ColumbusPolice

I have no idea which of these versions of the event is closer to the truth. Time will tell, but the history of police shootings of black people teaches us to be careful about what we believe, until the facts come out. For reference, see the original police statement about what happened to George Floyd.

The person who wrote that statement said he "got his information from sergeants who work in the area where Floyd was killed and from computer-aided dispatch, which serves as a log of , communications between officers and dispatchers.", without even viewing the bodycam footage:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/04/20/how-first-statement-minneapolis-police-made-george-floyds-murder-seem-like-george-floyds-fault/

Marty: Or do we just celebrate when any cop goes to jail?

hsh: So this was meant only to apply to rightful convictions?

I believe, Marty, that hsh has demonstrated he did "fucking pay attention."

Hasn't he?

Maybe Marty's point was that the only way to get a rightful conviction of a police officer in the US is to have lots of protests and riots over the police officer's crime. If so, I'd have wonder whose fault he would think that was.

But I don't think that was his point, of course.

Relevant to the discussion of police accountability:

https://www.propublica.org/article/what-police-impunity-looks-like-there-was-no-discipline-as-no-wrongdoing-was-found

It's not individual deaths that people are protesting (thought those individual deaths should absolutely be memorialized) it's the complete farce that passes for police accountability that they are protesting.

Chauvin was only found guilty because of footage the bystander took.

maybe we need more bystanders.

Chauvin was only found guilty because of footage the bystander took.

maybe we need more bystanders.

Seems like. That ProPublica article points out how the police withhold access to badge cam footage (when it even exists) from civilian review boards while the agency does its own internal investigations. This seems like a clear moral hazard to me since the agency has strong motivation to drag out the investigation as a way to avoid bad publicity.

Chauvin was only found guilty because of footage the bystander took.

maybe we need more bystanders.

Seems like. That ProPublica article points out how the police withhold access to badge cam footage (when it even exists) from civilian review boards while the agency does its own internal investigations. This seems like a clear moral hazard to me since the agency has strong motivation to drag out the investigation as a way to avoid bad publicity.

I'm considering installing ACLU's Mobile Justice app on my phone for this very reason:

https://www.aclu.org/issues/criminal-law-reform/reforming-police/mobile-justice

OT: speaking of Tucker Carlson.

Perhaps this is the story that @TuckerCarlson
was trying to get ahead of. In his college yearbook, he listed himself as a member of the "Dan White Society."

Dan White was the man who murdered Harvey Milk.

I certainly think something (more than usual, that is) is up with Tucker Carlson. The weirdly inappropriate way he laughed during that clip when he steered the conversation from unnecessary force in the Floyd case to "boarded up America" struck me as almost unhinged.

Dan White Society?

Looks like a further evolution of the Twinkie Defense.

Carlson does specialize in whipping whites into a froth.

And, Bobby, IMO that may be the least well thought out thing you ever wrote.

I'll take that as a compliment considering all the real clunkers I have unleashed here. You may have missed them.

But let us face facts. The huge wealth disparity exits. It does not appear to be closing in any substantial way. There can only be one reason for this fact, and it has nothing to do with black voters "on the Democratic plantation", one of the most politically dumb arguments I have ever seen. But then again, conservatives have never really come up with anything to explain this unambiguous and stark fact or effectively address the issue in terms of public policy.

Passing out free bootstraps simply won't cut it.

conservatives have never really come up with anything to explain this unambiguous and stark fact or effectively address the issue in terms of public policy.

Well, I'd say that the reactionaries DO have those. Their explanation is bogus (racial superiority), but they do have one. And their stated public policy (to do nothing, because there is nothing to address) follows from that.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

Blog powered by Typepad