Trolling? How so. 100% consistent with all prior views which are not likely to change in my lifetime. 100% in favor of a better life on the dem plantation.
Atlanta PD Fatally Shoots Black Man in the Back
- Thread starter Tony Stark
- Start date
Trolling? How so. 100% consistent with all prior views which are not likely to change in my lifetime. 100% in favor of a better life on the dem plantation.
Watch as the defense becomes...."I was not sure what he was pointing at me before I fired my weapon, I feared for my life", (even though we frisked him & already stated he fired taser at us).
inb4 any press including the video is inadmissible in court because it would slant the jury's opinion.
I've watched the video and.. yeah, the amount of time they took to breathalyze him is crazy, 40 minutes.
One could argue that the cop knowing he was drunk was hoping some higher priority call would drag him away but.. its happened too many times that hypoglycemia diabetics appear drunk, can even smell of alcohol (actually acetone, this can fool a breathalyze) and need medical attention.
I've arrested my fair share (but the circumstances don't come close), universally true though is you do not let things drag on as they get squirrely. Bad process started it. Then... shit hit the fan though they had patted him down and knew him to be unarmed. The officers sound like decent guys but I'd be interested to have a UK or most other European cops watch that and hear their reaction.
One could argue that the cop knowing he was drunk was hoping some higher priority call would drag him away but.. its happened too many times that hypoglycemia diabetics appear drunk, can even smell of alcohol (actually acetone, this can fool a breathalyze) and need medical attention.
I've arrested my fair share (but the circumstances don't come close), universally true though is you do not let things drag on as they get squirrely. Bad process started it. Then... shit hit the fan though they had patted him down and knew him to be unarmed. The officers sound like decent guys but I'd be interested to have a UK or most other European cops watch that and hear their reaction.
Last edited:
Another stupid comment. The video is everywhere. Regardless of whether it is admissible by the court as evidence, it will be considered.
You are entitled to your opinion... just like I am entitled to mine.
Even the Minneapolis politicians on the city council agreed that there was no policy against the neck restraint used by Officer Chauvin. They stated directly he did not violate policy which is why they changed the policy after the incident - Minneapolis Agrees To Ban Chokeholds & Require Officers To Intervene Against Unauthorized Use Of Force "Significant changes were announced at an emergency meeting of the Minneapolis City Council on Friday. Police officers in Minneapolis will no longer be allowed to use choke holds or neck restraints."
In my opinion both officers should be put on trial and hopefully convicted (based on the information that has been released) -- but you are not correct stating that there was "NOTHING in the Minnesota PD manual that permits that" in regards to using a neck restraint or choke hold in Minneapolis at the time of the incident.
That is not my point. It is like a cop saying the manual says he can use his baton to hit the person on the arm and then he bashes the person's arm 15 times repeatedly. You cannot go in court and say the manual said you coudl hit the person in the arm. There is a reasonableness standard because the law assumes you are not a moron.
If a choke hold is allowed but then you knee a guy in the neck for 8 mnutes while he is down on the ground and handcuffed, YOU WILL NOT have as a defense that the manual said you could do that. Any reasonableness standard would throw that right out when you stayed on his neck for 8 minutes while he complained he could not breath and was restrained.
it is not opinion, it is a legal precedent that can be found in many cases where people tried the bullshit they were following orders. Unless it says you can specifically do the exact thing you did, you will be held to the reasonableness standard and Chauvin failed miserably here. That is why I can say for sure there is nothing that allows Chauvin to knee neck the guy for 8 minutes like that. That is why he was fired by the way for cause.
Let's get back to the one question - tell us what Officer Chauvin was fired for? Tell us the exact cause for his firing.
Hint - it was not for violating police department policy for using a neck restraint. The police union would have easily reversed the firing decision if these grounds were used.
Please note that I am NOT saying what Chauvin did was in any way right in my opinion. But my opinion and the rules for policing standards can differ. The legal system standards can also differ from police department standards - which is why he is standing trial for murder. Quite rightfully in my opinion.
that's not a choke hold
It is a neck restraint. Along with a choke hold; both were perfectly allowed by the Minneapolis police department until the city council voted to not allow them after the incident.
The follow article from another thread provides much more detail on the Minneapolis situation with George Floyd.