Another "I can't breath" death: Police Reform & Protests in the USA

[Belize]

It’s been a while but I remember pictures with two other officers on him
At some if I’m not mistaken.

Regardless, the "physical fitness" argument goes out the window when male cops gun down children and sleeping women.

[cubby]

And the defense starts with blaming the victim.

Fucking lovely.

[Pannonian]

And the defense starts with blaming the victim.

Fucking lovely.

If its legal, but morally reprehensible, do you still need to do it as a lawyer if you think it is your best chance? I mean, i think its horrible, but isn't the problem in the first place that victim blaming works, not that people try it?

[Endus]

And the defense starts with blaming the victim.

Fucking lovely.

That shit should've resulted in a contempt of court charge from the judge and a consideration as to whether to permanently disbar the lawyer who brought that defense.

It's so obviously irrelevant to the case.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

And the defense starts with blaming the victim.

Fucking lovely.

Can't really blame the lawyers here...they're doing their job.

I doubt any other defense team would go with any other strategy. They can't deny that Chauvin was kneeling on Floyd's neck for 9 minutes...all they can do is try and place reasonable doubt that something else could have been what actually killed Floyd in the minds of the jury. It may be distasteful to blame the victim...but they are obligated to provide the best legal defense for their client that they can.

[Edge-]

Regardless, the "physical fitness" argument goes out the window when male cops gun down children and sleeping women.

Also like...the number of very obese officers that wouldn't be able to chase down someone in an electric wheelchair beyond a few blocks, lest they risk a heart attack.

The notion that all male police officers are the pinnacle of physical fitness is patently hilarious.

That shit should've resulted in a contempt of court charge from the judge and a consideration as to whether to permanently disbar the lawyer who brought that defense.

It's so obviously irrelevant to the case.

It's literally all they have. Seems they're trying to frame him as a drug addict that is non-compliant with officers (though hilariously the "example" they use shows further problems as the officer drew his weapon without any visible threat). Though the judge specifically batted that down, but it doesn't matter since the seed was planted -

"This evidence is being admitted solely for the limited purpose of showing what effects the ingestion of opioids may or may not have had on the physical well-being of George Floyd," Cahill told the jury on Tuesday. "This evidence is not to be used as evidence of the character of George Floyd."

It's morally reprehensible from my point of view, but it's the only angle I can see the defense having. They only need to convince 1-2 jurors to prevent a guilty verdict.

[Endus]

Can't really blame the lawyers here...they're doing their job.

I doubt any other defense team would go with any other strategy. They can't deny that Chauvin was kneeling on Floyd's neck for 9 minutes...all they can do is try and place reasonable doubt that something else could have been what actually killed Floyd in the minds of the jury.

There's two autopsies that both confirm cause of death being asphyxiation by way of knee on neck. You'd have to dispute those results concretely if you wanted to present an alternative argument on cause of death.

It may be distasteful to blame the victim...but they are obligated to provide the best legal defense for their client that they can.

Obligated to provide the best valid defense, yes.

Obligated to waste the court's time by using irrational and irrelevant pleas to character, that Floyd was "worth killing" because of a prior conviction? Not even a little.

[Edge-]

Obligated to provide the best valid defense, yes.

I don't think that's actually explicitly written like, anywhere.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

There's two autopsies that both confirm cause of death being asphyxiation by way of knee on neck. You'd have to dispute those results concretely if you wanted to present an alternative argument on cause of death.

They don't need to dispute the results concretely. They need to present reasonable doubt. That the autopsies could possibly be wrong.

Obligated to provide the best valid defense, yes.

Obligated to waste the court's time by using irrational and irrelevant pleas to character, that Floyd was "worth killing" because of a prior conviction? Not even a little.

To quote what Edge just posted:

"This evidence is being admitted solely for the limited purpose of showing what effects the ingestion of opioids may or may not have had on the physical well-being of George Floyd," Cahill told the jury on Tuesday. "This evidence is not to be used as evidence of the character of George Floyd."

Specific instructions to the jury that the testimony is not to be used as evidence about George Floyd's character and to strictly focus on the matter of the opioid usage

[Lost controller]

So you didn't actually watch the video then.

She wasn't the one cuffing the suspect, if you watched her body-cam video she was standing by. She attempted to help the officer cuffing the suspect pull the guy out of the vehicle when he attempted to flee, which is when she drew her service weapon.

Man, I swear this one is just bringing all the "Women are weak and shouldn't do man jobs" sexists out.

I don't know why your fixated on her being a woman but if you can't physically perform your job you shouldn't be doing it... if you saw the video there is no way you believe she was in control of the situation.

[Themius]

They don't need to dispute the results concretely. They need to present reasonable doubt. That the autopsies could possibly be wrong.



To quote what Edge just posted:



Specific instructions to the jury that the testimony is not to be used as evidence about George Floyd's character and to strictly focus on the matter of the opioid usage

They haven't presented any "reasonable" evidence that the autopsies could be wrong though... and the lawyer... my fucking god

"if we just ignore all the facts of the case... wouldn't you agree it could possibly maybe be something else?"

[Machismo]

I don't know why your fixated on her being a woman but if you can't physically perform your job you shouldn't be doing it... if you saw the video there is no way you believe she was in control of the situation.

SO, literally only the strongest person on the planet can be a police officer?

[Edge-]

I don't know why your fixated on her being a woman but if you can't physically perform your job you shouldn't be doing it... if you saw the video there is no way you believe she was in control of the situation.

You're the one that brought it up, stop projecting because you think women can't effectively perform their jobs as officers because you saw a video where one officer screwed up big, as if it's gender and not a massive failure in training and accountability that led to the tragedy.

She wasn't the one primarily handling the situation, she and another officer were there in a support roll.

Man, this shit just brings out all the sexist posts, doesn't it. Were it a guy that accidentally killed Wright I have no doubt you would be attacking him for his gender being incapable of controlling a situation.

[Lost controller]

SO, literally only the strongest person on the planet can be a police officer?

I mean we have the video. I don't see why we are trying to turn this into body builders fighting...

https://twitter.com/i/status/1381657719569010688

You can't ask for cops to be unable to restrain someone without lethal without them being physically fit. You can see how the situation spirals out of control.

[Edge-]

I mean we have the video. I don't see why we are trying to turn this into body builders fighting...

https://twitter.com/i/status/1381657719569010688

You can't ask for cops to be unable to restrain someone without lethal without them being physically fit. You can see how the situation spirals out of control.

The primary officer arresting Wright was a man. He lost control of the situation. By your logic, men shouldn't be allowed to be out on patrol.

[Endus]

They don't need to dispute the results concretely. They need to present reasonable doubt. That the autopsies could possibly be wrong.

That's not "reasonable doubt". Emphasis on the word "reasonable".

You can't just say "but hey, it MIGHT be wrong." You need to establish where they may have been wrong, where they made a call that could have gone either way, how another professional may have ruled differently (much harder with two mutually-corroborative autopsies, of course).

[Machismo]

I mean we have the video. I don't see why we are trying to turn this into body builders fighting...

https://twitter.com/i/status/1381657719569010688

You can't ask for cops to be unable to restrain someone without lethal without them being physically fit. You can see how the situation spirals out of control.

Once again... someone is always going to be stronger, unless it's literally the strongest dude on the planet. The male officer was larger, but even he lost control. Have you every tried to restrain someone? I'm guessing you have literally zero experience on the issue.

Do you have any evidence either of these offices is not physically fit?

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

I don't know why your fixated on her being a woman but if you can't physically perform your job you shouldn't be doing it... if you saw the video there is no way you believe she was in control of the situation.

I don't know why you're focused on physical fitness when the issue is that the officer apparently can't tell the difference between a taser and a glock.

[Endus]

I mean we have the video. I don't see why we are trying to turn this into body builders fighting...

https://twitter.com/i/status/1381657719569010688

You can't ask for cops to be unable to restrain someone without lethal without them being physically fit. You can see how the situation spirals out of control.

The officer passed the fitness standards to enter the police force.

Your position here isn't just biased, it's objectively wrong on the facts. The officer was physically fit for duty.

[Themius]

The primary officer arresting Wright was a man. He lost control of the situation. By your logic, men shouldn't be allowed to be out on patrol.

i could agree with that.

no men no women.

Hoenstly what is the point of it? Police don't really "stop" crime... they either show up to address crimes or they create crimes.

Why should cops do traffic stops? Why not leave that to the traffic people who don't have weapons? Why even stop people for taillights or what have you? Have a picture taken and mail a summons or whatever to the fucking address. It's all phising.