The Derek Chauvin / George Floyd Trial

[sportage]

Your a bootlicker.....don`t be ashamed that you favor the cops over Floyd....I bet you voted for trump....lol

Voted for Trump? I'd rather have bamboo shoots shoved up my fingernails. Call me anything that anyone wants to but NEVER accuse me of voting for not only Donald Trump, but voting for ANY republican. What I do is consider both sides of the issue. I put myself in the other guys place because it is important to understand, or try to understand where the other guy is coming from so you can better be prepared to fight back. I often play both sides of the fence just so that when or if the unthinkable happens, it's not so much of a shock.

PS. Watching the trial and the witnesses and their vast knowledge and input, occurs to me of how important witnesses are.... and how important it is that we get as much information as possible. Then I am reminded of Donald Trump and the impeachments of Donald Trump where NO WITNESSES were allowed and NO INFORMATION was allowed. All witnesses blocked from testifying, all subpoena's IGNORED. If this Chauvin trial were ran as the Donald Trump trial(s) were ran by the republicans, we would have NO VIDEO, we would have NO WITNESSES, and Derek Chauvin would easily... EASILY get off from lack of evidence. Just as was the case with Donald Trump!!!!! Just imagine, if you will. Just imagine how justice WORKS, and how justice can be made NOT TO WORK i.e. Donald Trump.

PSS. And personally, I do believe Floyd was murdered by this cop, actually by all three cops. However, playing both sides so not be surprised if some little kink in the system sets Chauvin free. Something like... oh say... claims that Chauvin was "misinformed" during trailing on how to properly use the knee to neck choke-hold. And thus, the will say it wasn't Chauvin's fault, it was the fault of THE TRAINING PROCESS. Just prepare yourself. Remember the trial of O.J. and that glove.

 

[pcgeek11]

Because you didn't tell us why you think there will be riots either way, so we are left to assume your reasoning for it, and based on your post history we believe that the most likely answer is because you are racist. Care to explain it to us?

Your answer is going to be something along the lines of 'because there always is' which shows us a racist bias since it is simply not true. It is instead an example of a racist propaganda that is intended to convince people that certain minorities are dangerous and deserve harsher treatment. And I think you truly don't understand that, which is why I think you are a racist. You have internalized the propaganda so much that you don't even question it.

Or, you are going to just dodge this question altogether, because you don't have a non-racist answer, and that too is something we notice.

That is just stupid. My comment is racist because I didn't justify it to your satisfaction.

No, I'm going to ignore your question because it is a stupid question. I have found on here no matter what I say I am accused of being a racist.

 

[pcgeek11]

I know it's what you believe. You believe if Chauvin is found guilty and George Floyd gets justice, black people will just go on looting and burning sprees.

I'll let others interpret why you believe that.

Yes do.

 

[woolfe9998]

You aren't adjusting for anything. Lifetime risk difference is estimated at ~2.5X of whites.

Risk of being killed by police use of force in the United States by age, race–ethnicity, and sex

Police violence is a leading cause of death for young men in the United States. Over the life course, about 1 in every 1,000 black men can expect to be killed by police. Risk of being killed by police peaks between the ages of 20 y and 35 y for men and women and for all racial and ethnic groups...

www.pnas.org

"Note that a rate ratio of 1 indicates equality in mortality risk relative to whites. The highest levels of inequality in mortality risk are experienced by black men. Black men are about 2.5 times more likely to be killed by police over the life course than are white men. "

Now factor in the variables that may explain that gap e.g. more violent crime/lower SES, and what do you think will happen to the 2.5:1 ratio? There isn't a whole lot left for "racism" of the cops to explain it.

Yes, also, while their risk of being killed by cops is 2.5x that of white men, their risk of being murdered is 6x that of white men.

Black Males' Murder Risk 6 Times as High as Whites'

There is one chance in 21 that a black American male will be murdered, odds about six times greater than those confronting white men, according to a survey of crime risks released Sunday by the Bureau of Justice Statistics.

www.latimes.com

I feel this is a point which is often missed in this kind of discussion.

 

[Fenixgoon]

Yes, also, while their risk of being killed by cops is 2.5x that of white men, their risk of being murdered is 6x that of white men.

Black Males' Murder Risk 6 Times as High as Whites'

There is one chance in 21 that a black American male will be murdered, odds about six times greater than those confronting white men, according to a survey of crime risks released Sunday by the Bureau of Justice Statistics.

www.latimes.com

I feel this is a point which is often missed in this kind of discussion.

ah yes, i wonder why when we've socially and economically devestated an entire group of people for generations, that assessments on things like health and quality of life are poor in comparison to other groups... very puzzling indeed.

 

[Jaskalas]

Now I believe, after watching the videos, that Chauvin will probably get off for one reason, that the neck hold WAS LEGAL in the state of Minnesota when Chauvin used it, however Chauvin used the neck hold inappropriately.

Perhaps the legal hold is not the same as crushing a man until he dies.
I am enraged after hearing from that EMT.

Derek Chauvin's former supervisor testifies his restraint of George Floyd violated use-of-force policies

Title says it all. His fellow officers do not endorse this act of murder.

 

[Torn Mind]

Derek Chauvin's former supervisor testifies his restraint of George Floyd violated use-of-force policies

Title says it all. His fellow officers do not endorse this act of murder.

Just his former sergeant. No one else from there testified today.

 

[Jhhnn]

Just his former sergeant. No one else from there testified today.

So what? If what the Sergeant offered isn't true, I'm sure the defense will provide evidence to the contrary. Fat chance of that.

 

[Torn Mind]

So what? If what the Sergeant offered isn't true, I'm sure the defense will provide evidence to the contrary. Fat chance of that.

The correction is limited to just pointing one spoke and not many. While one voice in authority is strong, it is not the same as many stating something unanimously. Nothing more than that.

I did listen through most of the exchange. The jury listened to numerous questions and answers that they have to evaluate in the situation to determine what applies and what does not. In this case, it's more of a flurry of question to make the jury "consider this" vs "consider that". The defense tried to emphasize the factors such as the crowd being legit interference while the state brought more emphasis towards the medical needs, etc.

If it were me, I would have deemed the crowd non-threatening, that the cause of their anger was due to the cop misconduct and had the cop stopped, the cops would not have to worry about them. Chauvin indeed crossed at least one line in his conduct with regards to letting off.

I am solely concerned on matters that would persuade the jury or not, which is why the paramedic named Seth's answer that he did not know much about acidosis got me triggered. I can fire up youtube and find two EMT training channels tell be about bicarbonate, acidosis, and the two general types even if the deeper specifics are not addressed. Now, perhaps the judge would have shut him down for not being an expert, but the cluelessness he tried to display was not credible to me.

 

[Pipeline 1010]

That's not really the point I was addressing though. See my response to Bryce above.

So far as that specific point, it's a discussion that goes nowhere. The usual reply is that crime statistics show far more black people committing violent crimes so of course they are being killed by police in disproportionate numbers, then the response is that they have higher conviction rates because of racist policing. And there is no way on objective evidence to resolve the issue.

I don't have answers either, but I do think there is a predictable outcome of overpolicing/overincarceration of black people/neighborhoods, especially for non-violent drug crimes. I think the outcome is that we put them in prison at very high numbers and prison doesn't make them into good people. I believe prison makes it far more likely to be a violent person when you get out. There are numerous studies that back this up. A prison record also all but ruins your chances at ever getting a good job. So you get out 1) violent 2) hopeless 3) without an economic future. I think imprisoning a large portion of a community (for non-violent crimes) leads to more violence in that community in the long term. Violent communities get policed a lot. It is what it is. Yet it feeds the vicious cycle of overincarceration-violence-overincarceration. It is a predictable outcome.

So what do we do? Stop responding to calls for help in black neighborhoods? Stop policing violent cities so much? That's not a solution. If anything, I think ending the war on drugs would have a massive positive outcome in black communities (all communities, really) by taking away a reason to needlessly incarcerate people, perpetuating the cycle.

Anyhow, I don't have answers, nor solutions, but I do think there are strategies that could make things better.

 

[Pipeline 1010]

I can venture an answer here. Because in black urban neighborhoods, drugs tend to be dealt by gangs outdoors on the streets, while in white neighborhoods, drugs tend to be dealt behind closed doors. It is much easier to catch people dealing drugs out on the street. A suitable vantage and a pair of binoculars is all you need. This attracts police to those communities because they are looking for "low hanging fruit" busts.

^ This makes me thing you might not have ever actually been in a black urban neighborhood. I don't think what you are describing above is a thing. Where are you getting this from? Are you asserting that black people are just so damn stupid, that after decades of seeing their young men easily caught selling drugs by cops with binoculars, that they still just sell it out in the open? That's bold.

It's also why there is so much violence associated with drug trafficking in those neighborhoods. Because gangs are territorial. They see someone from another gang, or an independent dealer, out on "their" street corner, and the next thing you know, they are driving by shooting out their car windows, hitting a 7 year old bystander instead.

I'm not positively certain that this difference in the manner in which drugs are trafficked accounts for all the disparity in busts, but I feel like it definitely accounts for some of it.

End the war on drugs then. It's not enforceable. It leads to tons of violence. Same as alcohol prohibition. We're supposed to learn from history, not repeat its mistakes.

 

[woolfe9998]

^ This makes me thing you might not have ever actually been in a black urban neighborhood. I don't think what you are describing above is a thing. Where are you getting this from? Are you asserting that black people are just so damn stupid, that after decades of seeing their young men easily caught selling drugs by cops with binoculars, that they still just sell it out in the open? That's bold.

You basically just said, no, there are no gangs who deals drugs on street corners in black urban neighborhoods, and that I'm racist for saying so.

What is your experience in such neighborhoods? Please explain.

Please also explain how your superior experience means that the Washington Post is both misinformed and racist.

This partly reflects racial differences in the drug markets in black and white communities. In poor black neighborhoods, drugs tend to be sold outdoors, in the open. In white neighborhoods, by contrast, drug transactions typically happen indoors, often between friends and acquaintances. If you sell drugs outside, you're much more likely to get caught.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/09/30/white-people-are-more-likely-to-deal-drugs-but-black-people-are-more-likely-to-get-arrested-for-it/

End the war on drugs then. It's not enforceable. It leads to tons of violence. Same as alcohol prohibition. We're supposed to learn from history, not repeat its mistakes.

Yes, that's exactly my opinion. But you really need to address what you posted above.

 

[pcgeek11]

Seems quite prevalent:

Drug deals on the street - Google Suche

 

[interchange]

You aren't adjusting for anything. Lifetime risk difference is estimated at ~2.5X of whites.

Risk of being killed by police use of force in the United States by age, race–ethnicity, and sex

Police violence is a leading cause of death for young men in the United States. Over the life course, about 1 in every 1,000 black men can expect to be killed by police. Risk of being killed by police peaks between the ages of 20 y and 35 y for men and women and for all racial and ethnic groups...

www.pnas.org

"Note that a rate ratio of 1 indicates equality in mortality risk relative to whites. The highest levels of inequality in mortality risk are experienced by black men. Black men are about 2.5 times more likely to be killed by police over the life course than are white men. "

Now factor in the variables that may explain that gap e.g. more violent crime/lower SES, and what do you think will happen to the 2.5:1 ratio? There isn't a whole lot left for "racism" of the cops to explain it.

There is really no good statistical way to determine this. But adding this data as a platform for normalizing our observations is still immensely helpful. Thanks for bringing it to the thread.

 

[Jhhnn]

The correction is limited to just pointing one spoke and not many. While one voice in authority is strong, it is not the same as many stating something unanimously. Nothing more than that.

I did listen through most of the exchange. The jury listened to numerous questions and answers that they have to evaluate in the situation to determine what applies and what does not. In this case, it's more of a flurry of question to make the jury "consider this" vs "consider that". The defense tried to emphasize the factors such as the crowd being legit interference while the state brought more emphasis towards the medical needs, etc.

If it were me, I would have deemed the crowd non-threatening, that the cause of their anger was due to the cop misconduct and had the cop stopped, the cops would not have to worry about them. Chauvin indeed crossed at least one line in his conduct with regards to letting off.

I am solely concerned on matters that would persuade the jury or not, which is why the paramedic named Seth's answer that he did not know much about acidosis got me triggered. I can fire up youtube and find two EMT training channels tell be about bicarbonate, acidosis, and the two general types even if the deeper specifics are not addressed. Now, perhaps the judge would have shut him down for not being an expert, but the cluelessness he tried to display was not credible to me.

Ridiculous. Hopefully the jury sees through the defense better than you have.

 

[SKORPI0]

Watching on CNN.

 

[Jaskalas]

I am solely concerned on matters that would persuade the jury or not, which is why the paramedic named Seth's answer that he did not know much about acidosis got me triggered. I can fire up youtube and find two EMT training channels tell be about bicarbonate, acidosis, and the two general types even if the deeper specifics are not addressed. Now, perhaps the judge would have shut him down for not being an expert, but the cluelessness he tried to display was not credible to me.

I did not see that exchange. As you mention it, could you help explain the subject, what acidosis has to do with anything in this trial?
I don't know why they asked it or why you care about its answer. Seems to me as if they asked the color of the sky that day. Its significance escapes me.

 

[Torn Mind]

Ridiculous. Hopefully the jury sees through the defense better than you have.

You're not very good at reading people fairly. The defense is weak and can be pierced rather easily if the jury are not nuts. .

 

[HomerJS]

The correction is limited to just pointing one spoke and not many. While one voice in authority is strong, it is not the same as many stating something unanimously. Nothing more than that.

I did listen through most of the exchange. The jury listened to numerous questions and answers that they have to evaluate in the situation to determine what applies and what does not. In this case, it's more of a flurry of question to make the jury "consider this" vs "consider that". The defense tried to emphasize the factors such as the crowd being legit interference while the state brought more emphasis towards the medical needs, etc.

If it were me, I would have deemed the crowd non-threatening, that the cause of their anger was due to the cop misconduct and had the cop stopped, the cops would not have to worry about them. Chauvin indeed crossed at least one line in his conduct with regards to letting off.

I am solely concerned on matters that would persuade the jury or not, which is why the paramedic named Seth's answer that he did not know much about acidosis got me triggered. I can fire up youtube and find two EMT training channels tell be about bicarbonate, acidosis, and the two general types even if the deeper specifics are not addressed. Now, perhaps the judge would have shut him down for not being an expert, but the cluelessness he tried to display was not credible to me.

Will 2 be enough for you to accept that was not an acceptable use f force in that PD

If 2 testify to that will you require 3?

Does EVERY member of the MPD have to stipulate for you to accept?

 

[sportage]

New twist on the incident...
What if George Floyd knew that he was destined to die the very moment that officer Derek Chauvin tapped his baton on the car window of George Floyd? Drug usage has been blamed for Floyd’s actions and reactions during Floyd’s arrest, but what if Floyd knew? Somehow, that Floyd had envisioned or dreamed or experience some personal prophecy that this was the day he would die and Derek Chauvin was his angel of death. His grim reaper. That the moment when Derek Chauvin tapped on the car window, the event took on a life of its own. A life of its own that could not be altered, a life of its own that would end in the death of George Floyd, by the hands of Derek Chauvin, and George Floyd knew this immediately with a baton tap to his car window. Seriously, just think about the many deaths of black men throughout history. Martin Luther King eerily perceived his death and said so in his “I Have a Dream” speech when King said “ I may not get there with you”. King knew, King knew he was to die. Malcolm X knew that he would die. Medgar Evers knew that he would die. Thousands of black men in the 1950’s knew that they would die, would die by lynching when confronted by the clan. More recently, Eric Garner knew that he would die the moment police confronted him for selling cigarettes. Black men know, they know from the very moment a clansman or a police officer comes into their world that they will die. With George Floyd it began with a tap on the window by Derek Chauvin. From that moment both George Floyd and Derek Chauvin shared a world, a world of destiny. Both knew this would end with a death. The death of George Floyd. Floyd knew this, Chauvin knew this, and nothing could have stopped or alter the outcome. But my point is, somehow someway George Floyd knew, knew from the start that he was going to die and that Derek Chauvin would be his assassin. Floyd knew. They both knew. George Floyd fought and resisted because he knew he was going to die.

 

[Torn Mind]

The jury will find Lt. Richard Zimmerman's testimony will have some extremely salient points. Someone who is cuffed is much less of a danger. After someone is cuffed, the person is your responsibility. The prone position should not be kept indefinitely.

The Jon Edwards testimony was basically nothing more than just laying out what happened afterwards and just that he did things professionally.

Unless the jury are nuts, it is extremely hard to fathom him getting away with a full acquittal.

 

[Torn Mind]

Will 2 be enough for you to accept that was not an acceptable use f force in that PD

If 2 testify to that will you require 3?

Does EVERY member of the MPD have to stipulate for you to accept?

I already accepted.
One is enough.

I think you got triggered by something in your head.

 

[Torn Mind]

Will 2 be enough for you to accept that was not an acceptable use f force in that PD

If 2 testify to that will you require 3?

Does EVERY member of the MPD have to stipulate for you to accept?

Indeed, I wonder who are you talking to. I have already concluded that Chavuin actually did murder in the first degree but he'll never put those thoughts on the record.

Don't debate ghosts. Don't disrespect people with irrationality. I'm not quite wired normally and find this type of response far more offensive than curse words other sorts of anger expression.

 

[Jaskalas]

Painting over people to colorize them the way "you" see fit, makes it easier to label and attack them as an enemy. It is basically just a shortcut hardwired into our brains. Nuance requires energy and effort. Expenditures we instinctively try to avoid. So we paint over people and fit them into boxes. Somehow you got shoved into one such box. As you witness more politics, you will see how commonly such things are posted. It is a form of straw man, and quite unpleasant to be the subject of.

 

[Jaskalas]

Derek Chauvin’s Use Of Force ‘Totally Unnecessary,’ Minneapolis Police Lt. Testifies

Looks like the police force has come out against crushing / choking a person until they die. Good for them.
Now it is up to the jury to believe the police, to believe the witnesses such as the firefighter / EMT.
George Floyd was murdered and he needs justice.