Let's also not look past the fentanyl in his system or the evidence of recent methamphetamine use.The Defense is going to be all over this. Floyd's family had an 'independent' autopsy done and their results were released on Monday.
Cause of death: Homicide due to asphyxia.
Fuck a duck if a jury finds that officer 'not guilty', cause brother...you ain't seen riots in the street like you will that night.
Little piece of trivia, I don't have the numbers in front of me, but getting a murder conviction on a Minnesota police officer, is about as rare as @AWP attending a Nickleback concert.
The most recent was a Minneapolis Somali police officer convicted of killing a white, Australian woman. The BLM stance was, "of course you convict the black cop of killing a white woman'.
My favorite on this (without diverging too far) is when people assume cops have more training than anybody else when it comes to firearms. In Florida, cops are only required to shoot their weapon for qualification once every two years. Defensive Tactics (ground fighting and take downs), same thing. Now to be fair, most agencies require internally to qualify once a year in all high liability areas (driving, firearms, DT). However, just like in the Army, there were cops that should NEVER have been issued a sidearm, badge, baton, or taser. I recall once instance at the range when a neighboring rural agency had one cop that had his slide rusted shut because he hadn't pulled his weapon from his holster since the last qual two years earlier. Some agencies try to do as much training as their budget, and the administration allows.Think your police are poorly trained now...
I think the possibility increases day by day. Just like some famous cases here in FL, they will go for the sexy charges, and not the ones they could realistically prove. Then again this could all be for show. I am willing to bet money the defense is gonna throw the agency under the bus and try to go for something similar to qualified immunity. They will likely argue (among other tactics) that they followed policy and training, and it was the agency that is at fault for the death.He is going to get acquitted If the DA keeps upping the charges.
Shooting of Samuel DuBose - Wikipedia
watched this unfold locally. Cop canoed the guys head on camera. He was guilty of murder but not premeditated murder. The DA was stupid. Depending how the the laws are written in MN, this guy is going free.
It's pure politics at this point. You have a sitting AG in MN that's also a former U.S. Representative and a political activist. He sees personal opportunity.I think the possibility increases day by day. Just like some famous cases here in FL, they will go for the sexy charges, and not the ones they could realistically prove. Then again this could all be for show. I am willing to bet money the defense is gonna throw the agency under the bus and try to go for something similar to qualified immunity. They will likely argue (among other tactics) that they followed policy and training, and it was the agency that is at fault for the death.
True on all counts, but to be fair, it isn't uncommon for DAs/AGs and the like to come down and take a high profile case regardless of party affiliation.It's pure politics at this point. You have a sitting AG in MN that's also a former U.S. Representative and a political activist. He sees personal opportunity.
My favorite on this (without diverging too far) is when people assume cops have more training than anybody else when it comes to firearms. In Florida, cops are only required to shoot their weapon for qualification once every two years. Defensive Tactics (ground fighting and take downs), same thing. Now to be fair, most agencies require internally to qualify once a year in all high liability areas (driving, firearms, DT). However, just like in the Army, there were cops that should NEVER have been issued a sidearm, badge, baton, or taser. I recall once instance at the range when a neighboring rural agency had one cop that had his slide rusted shut because he hadn't pulled his weapon from his holster since the last qual two years earlier. Some agencies try to do as much training as their budget, and the administration allows.
Agreed....but usually they have some sort of experience as a prosecutor...or court room experience...or even a current license to practice law. None of these are true with Ellison, except possibly the last one (he was not current 2 years ago, it's possible he's done some continuing ed to get it current again). MN law does not require the AG to be an attorney or have a license to practice law. It's rare, but Ellison is evidence that it can happen. That is a recipe for a shit show, regardless of party affiliation.True on all counts, but to be fair, it isn't uncommon for DAs/AGs and the like to come down and take a high profile case regardless of party affiliation.
I've heard of her, but I'm not on social media so I only have cursory glance of her views. Anyone have cliff notes of her interview?So who is this Candice Owens? She's got a "checkmark" by her name so I'm assuming she's 'somebody'? This video popped up on my Facebook feed today. She's coming out against the support for George Floyd and calling out the BLM movement.
Not sure what to make of her... @R.Caerbannog , are you aware of her? Thoughts?
Was he upset when Clinton moved Marines into LA during those riots?Because he’s right.
Let’s say yes? Or no. Or who cares how he felt then? The purpose of the letter was to highlight a guy (President) that he’s personally worked for as a member of the admin. A person that he thinks has overstepped his constitutional bounds and has damaged the presidency.Was he upset when Clinton moved Marines into LA during those riots?
You would think after the highly publicized Eric Garner death that kneeling on someone's neck or chest for too long would be known as lethal force, independent of: asthma, cardiovascular disease, Covid-19, recent drug use etc.
Not a lawyer, but whatever charges they come up with better damn well be provable in a court of law, because like it or not, this cop still has rights.
Was he upset when Clinton moved Marines into LA during those riots?Because he’s right.
I don't see why usung an existing law is a threat to the constitution, unlike weaponizing the DoJ. I wonder how Mattis feels about that?Let’s say yes? Or no. Or who cares how he felt then? The purpose of the letter was to highlight a guy (President) that he’s personally worked for as a member of the admin. A person that he thinks has overstepped his constitutional bounds and has damaged the presidency.
Was the impetus for that non action 25 years ago punitive (he wasn’t allowed) or a personal decision (he didn’t feel the same way about Clinton as the Commander in a Chief)?
My question would be- who cares? Not the time, context or same situation.
For all those that insist that the right doesn’t play “cancel culture” and “you were my hero but you dared oppose the emperor so now you’re my villain”, please see the current reaction to Gen Mattis.
Crazy. When the president appointed him to his position, he was a lifelong patriot. Now he’s not- is it because we learned more about him or is it because he no longer supports our narrative?
I quit Facebook yesterday, the reason was this post you just made.I tell you what is getting to me now is the massive virtue signaling, on social media, at work, everywhere, where it seems to be a race to see who is the most 'un-racist.'
Both of the things are correct.I personally don't think sending in AD is the correct response. I also think Mattis needs to face what happened at Theranos.
I quit Facebook yesterday, the reason was this post you just made.
I had literally typed almost exactly what you just said, and within minutes was getting lit up for my“insensitivite” comments.
I deleted the post, locked down my homepage and vowed never to post again.
The only thing you’ll find there going forward is a picture of me and my email address.
Both of the things are correct.