Bitcoin Forum

In these crazy times let's not forget this isn't the first time that this exact same thing has happened.

Eric Garner said I can't breathe 11 times, he was pronounced dead an hour later. He was accused of a petty crime and allegedly resisted arrest. There were multiple officers present and he was unarmed, so it's ridiculous that he would be killed by the police and that it would be viewed like anything other than murder.

For example in the UK unarmed police used their problem solving ability to stop a psychotic man with a machete that was threatening police without killing him.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4SrDd8oD6fk
Title: UK Police Deescalate Stunningly Dangerous Situation & Save A Man's Life
TLDW: Man on the street, wielding a machete and moving arround erratically is surrounded by the UK police, the police try and keep him contained while verbally de-escalating the situation, waiting for other officers to get shields and stuff.


Now here's a 2014 clip, that includes a compilation of the usual people defending the cops, with the host Jon Stewart roasting them meanwhile.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8KqDIPdCOg

At some point a promiment right winger claims that the police don't do that, in defending the cop that it's against the policy of every police department. Well, I guess it's not.


Here's my take on how we solve this. The police are allowed to do these things because they are  supposed to protect civilians. Any abuse of that power should come with a greater penalty then that of a civillian for the simple reason of breaking that trust that we put up on them.

For example, if it's murder, and it's done by a cop the cop has to face a more severe punishment for also breaking that trust. Not fired, not suspended without pay but sent to jail for life. 

If George's (Floyd) relatives considered that he was their property, and sued the cops and their bonds in common law, court of record, man to man, for stealing their property, they could win a lot.

To see how to do it the right way, combine what Karl Lentz (https://www.youtube.com/user/765736) has to say with the things that Richard Cornforth (http://voidjudgments.net/) has found.

When you need more air, because you can't get enough to breathe, you don't use a ventilator on a person, like the cop essentially did with George. One death - George - but all kinds of Covid deaths in hospitals, because ventilating people keeps them from getting the oxygen they need to live.

8)

@KonstantinosM what happened with George was sad, and the policeman should have definitely used better tactics to tackle the situation, but I also feel that the blame lies on higher authorities for failing to educate the police to use better tactics, and empowering them with unlimited power which they’re misusing on innocent citizens.

It’s also pertinent to note that post this incident Portland mayor, has banned the use of tear gas being fired at the protesters unless there no other option left but to use it.

Source:

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/live-blog/2020-06-06-george-floyd-protests-n1226451

While this is going to look a bit touch to try to think about, I think that it took people a very long time to notice that this was a real problem in America and that it needed to be acted on. While the officer involved in choking Garner to death didn't face any prison time or anything along those lines, that officer was terminated from his job in the NYPD (even if it was 5 years after what he had done)

I think that the video of Floyd is more gruesome though -- not trying to rate these murders -- as watching someone with a knee on someone elses neck looks a lot more reckless then putting someone in a choke-hold. I don't know if that sounds stupid or anything, but that's just what I think.

Takes time for people to notice these things, and hopefully we can bring forward some real change in the coming years. Who knows what that'll look like.

There are thousands of police people interactions going on every single day. Each with different individuals from both sides, involved in tense situations. No matter what, as the years pass by, some interactions are going to be insane, while others are going to in credible. It's just the way it's going to be.

One thing that I noticed about both cases is that Eric Gardner was 6'5" and George Floyd was 6'6". Very big men. I don't think that's a coincidence. When an average person comes across a person that tall, they almost seem like giants and I think that contributed to the officers being so forceful. Their height, along with health problems could had contributed to all this.

The standard defense to that is "if you can breath, you can talk".  It's all fine if the restraint is temporary.  That officer is guilty of negligent homicide at the least and second degree murder at the worst.  The other officers will be charged for failing to stop a crime in progress, and they will defend with the unwritten rules of the brotherhood of the shield.  :/


That is how it's supposed to be.  A judge should sentence crime from a position of trust as repeat offenders.   This officer should be charged with two consecutive life sentences for second degree murder.  But they will take into account many other factors, such as his job duties vs that of a lawyer, for example.


If found guilty, he'll probably get life for 2nd degree, with parole in ten years.   They will take two years off for the year it took him to get his sentence.  Then he'll be a prime candidate for an ankle bracket and confinement at home, if the public loses interest in a few years.

Yes, our American justice system is fucked up. 

You are a Canuck. You don't speak for The United States no matter how bored you are in your frozen wasteland to the North.

I'm thinking that Chauvin is going to get charged with second degree Murder and even if he does life, the guy isn't going to survive prison. He's probably going to be murdered by someone who is doing life without parole.

Also I'm not exactly sure if those cops are going to hold that whole 'thin blue line' nonsense. Two of the four cops were still on their probationary period, they're fired and they're not going to be rehired (none of them will be) so at this point -- I'd most likely flip to save myself from a jail sentence just because some fucking asshole thought that putting his knee on someones neck was completely okay.

If I'm facing years in jail -- fuck the thing blue line and fuck all of that, I'm not getting a pension nor any benefits nor do I have a chance of being rehired -- flip and save yourself in both the public light and in your criminal case.

You are a Yank. I have just as much right to call myself an American as you do.   I am a Canadian citizen living in America.   There are a billion of us in America. :)

Are you brushing up on qualified immunity? I'm not immersed in legalese, only just learned of the term on Last Week tonight.

It sounds like you understand the legal system a lot better then most of us. Is qualified immunity just a cop thing? What if you're a chef at a restaurant and serve some old seafood, or some food contaminated with allergens, (when you knew the food was bad or contaminated) and someone dies. Do you get to claim qualified immunity?

And let's go with a nazi themed analogy since we're on the internet and think about the Nuremberg trials, if we applied our legal system, would they all get qualified immunity?

I'd say that is partially brushing up on Qualified Immunity and partially brushing up on the fact that when you're sitting in front of a jury, and your lawyer is explaining that you've dedicated your career to public service and talk about all of the good in you (even if you did kill someone) -- the jury will be a bit nicer to you, alongside the judge, as they've been shown to feel pity for a public servant who made a mistake (not to take away from the horrid act done to Floyd just pointing that out)

Also - the judges who are going to be setencing you are most likely going to want / need the police unions endorsement when it's election time. Just another great part of our democracy, elected judges, lol.

Qualified Immunity btw is something that shields government officials from liability, see here:


Can read through the link if you want, tad confusing. But a 2020 retuers report summed up how it related to Police Brutality - https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-police-immunity-scotus-snapshot/six-takeaways-from-reuters-investigation-of-police-violence-and-qualified-immunity-idUSKBN22K1AM

Technically that is true. In reality, qualified immunity is used as almost a total shield from liability for law enforcement. As civil asset forfeiture was originally designed to confiscate proceeds from drug dealers and other criminals, it eventually became a "legal" method of robbing innocent people, much like qualified immunity has become almost a total shield from responsibility for police negligence.

Qualified immunity, or a form of it, is almost exactly the thing that Hitler's minions tried to use at the Nuremberg trials. But it didn't work for them. Why not? Because they were called out at Nuremberg as men, not as government officials.

Originally in the USA, people were always called out as people, not in their legal person capacity. Certainly it was mentioned that they were ACTING in their legal person capacity. But it was [wo]men who were doing the act that they did. And as [wo]men, what they did was based on how they harmed someone who didn't deserve it, or at least didn't deserve the quality/quantity of harm done to them.

Innocent until proven guilty. Certainly government people, especially law enforcement, need to restrict and restrain people who are harming others. The question is, how much? The restraint must match the resistance. If a man is harming other people, and he resists restraint, he must be restrained with the same force that he is resisting with.

A person who is guilty, is not assumed to be guilty just because it looks like he is guilty. That's Old West law. String him up. Mob rule.

We have better ways through the courts. The trick that government has learned to use, so that they can get away with restricting and restraining people far more than necessary, is they have taken the focus off the majority of the basic law, and placed it onto a sliver of law that is called legal law. This part of law doesn't recognize the rights of people... at least not enough of the time.

We need to get back into focusing on the rest of the law - the law that holds around the world - do no harm. If anybody harms someone else, the focus must be on the harm he did, like in the Nuremberg trials... not the governmental position he holds.

8)

Yup, you're right in regards to it becoming into a total shield for all police misconduct and negligence. The attorneys for these police departments have taken Qualified Immunity, which should've been a somewhat OKAY thing to have -- and have changed it into an all encompassing shield.

I don't blame them, as they're obviously going to want to ensure that their own guys are getting into trouble. The judiciary / legislative branch is going to have to change how they look at qualified immunity and fix it.

I've seen some articles saying that the Supreme Court may take up the issue relating to qualified immunity soon. As there are currently 8 pending cases relating to qualified immunity waiting at the SC (https://www.npr.org/2020/06/08/870165744/supreme-court-weighs-qualified-immunity-for-police-accused-of-misconduct) Two justices have called for changes see below:

State governments are actually going against the Nuremberg Trials Code of Ethics that came about because of those Trials. Are States really trying to be as bad as Hitler?


New York State Barr Association proposes mandatory COVID-19 vaccine, in violation of Nuremburg code, medical ethics, informed consent (https://www.naturalnews.com/2020-06-09-new-york-state-barr-association-proposes-mandatory-covid-19-vaccine.html)




8)

Do yourselves a favor and look up the term - excited delirium.
Then look up another one - positional asphyxiation.

Put the two together and you'll see what cops face every day.
  
Then find the Minneapolis PD policy on use of force.  You'll see that the neck restraint is still an approved tactic. It finally got pulled after this incident (20 years behind most other departments)

Now, with the three things above, you should be able to deduce that :
People in Floyd's condition can fight right up until they code. They have amazing strength while under the influence. Tasers are often ineffective in this scenario. Suggested procedure for excited delirium is contain and restrain until EMS arrives. The antiquated neck restraint policy suggests MPD officers have been using it for a long time without issue.  (Most other departments have removed that policy for the very reason it's in the spotlight today). The officers on scene failed to consider positional asphyxiation.  They kept Floyd face down. The inability to breath wasn't due to the officer at the neck, it was due to the officer on his back restricting the expansion of Floyd's chest.

This was the perfect storm of drugs, criminal, resisting arrest, bad Department policy, and oblivious cops.


Then, if you are ready for even more education, go to the Black Lives Matter website.  Click on the donate button.  You'll be redirected to ActBlue who will accept your donation. Then take a look at where ActBlue sends the money. ( a simple google search reveals everything).

This isn't about race guys. Police departments around the world deal with excited delirium every day. This one went wrong, as they can easily do.

It's all politics. There's an election to influence.

I will simplify it for everyone...

"Donations, Including International Funding, to BlackLivesMatter.com Go Directly to the DNC – This Is Money Laundering"

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/06/exclusive-donations-including-international-funding-blacklivesmatter-com-go-directly-dnc-money-laundering/

Not quite. The money goes to ActBlue Charities which gives solely to 501(c)(3) non-profits. ActBlue PAC is the PAC and does not receive donations from BLM.

https://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/actblue-charities/

If the money collected by ActBlue Charities was found to be going to ActBlue PAC, then yes, that would be a violation of campaign finance laws.


That's the problem. Solutions need to be found in order to lessen the potential for things to go wrong so easily.

https://secure.actblue.com/content/fineprint

https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/expenditures.php?cmte=C00401224&cycle=2020

He also continued resisting arrest while saying he was unable to breathe. If you are in an altercation with someone and you cannot breathe, you should submit, not ask for mercy. He was being lawfully arrested, and being lawfully arrested involves using force. If the police were not able to use force to lawfully arrest suspects, all anyone would need to do is resist arrest, and you could do whatever you wanted, including harm other people.

I have lived within walking distance to a popular bar in my city, and some number of years ago the cops were wrestling a big dude, trying to arrest him, and put him in handcuffs, lots of people were watching. During the skirmish, he was claiming to be unable to breathe, yet he continued to fight back. At one point he what I assumed to pretend to pass out, the police put what I assume to be smelling salts to his nose, he made a funny face and continued to struggle. Eventually, he was put in handcuffs and tried to fight being put into the police car. I remember one person saying "there is no way this guy is going to jail tonight" after he was handcuffed. It was amazing how many people were around who were either medical or legal experts who were able to give their opinion on the matter. One girl claimed to be a paramedic but couldn't attend to him because she "was drunk".

Anyway, I am curious as to how often people under arrest falsely claim to be unable to breathe. 

My bet is the DA will intentionally botch the case with the hope it will cause more riots, and to push the false narrative that racist police can kill black people with impunity. Hopefully, Trump will be able to successfully bring civil rights charges against him that will carry substantial jail time.

This is an important point. According to their lawyers, one of them was on the job for 4 days, and both (of the two) were being trained by Chauvin. This means that Chauvin had some level of control over two of the officers. This changes my perspective as to what happened with regards to the other officers. I don't see the other officers being able to find any kind of employment for years. This is especially true considering everyone in the US is now subject to the Social Credit System (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Credit_System).

There are already 3 easy to follow solutions that everyone involved in this incident failed to follow:
1. cops failed to follow the rules taught for positional asphyxiation (sit em up, or put em on their side)
2  criminal failed to follow the Nancy Reagan rule, don't to drugs.
3 criminal failed to follow the rule of common sense, don't fight the cops.


Apparently the cops and criminals in Minneapolis are all too stupid to figure this out.

Quite often.  Usually when they're on drugs and fighting. My department had another one just yesterday. But the four officers properly controlled him, kept him upright, and detained against a guardrail til EMS got there to Ketamine the guy.  
   The hospital called a few hours later and to quote the work email, the doctor said “had they pinned him down on his stomach, he could have easily fought till he coded”.

The other one we see a lot is the phantom "chest pains" when they don't want to go to jail. False 99% of the time based on my 2 decades of experience. But, we still have a duty to render aid, so EMS gets called out.

Appearently an ambulance was called. If the cries for help is an everyday occurrence, if the other officers were not in a position to see how Chauvin's knee was placed, it may not be reasonable to hold them accountable, depending on the specific procedures of their department, and considering they were still in training. At the very least, I would reserve judgment until the trial. 

Or, another point to consider.  Chauvin's knee at the neck might not have been the 'aha' moment everyone thinks it was.  I'd be willing to make a small wager that the officer on Floyd's back was the real trigger for positional asphyxiation.

I have found it strange that someone could choke via pressure on the back of their neck. That is not something I have heard of until about two weeks ago.

Sadly, this probably doesn't matter. Chauvin has already been tried in public. There had been about 20+ police officers stationed outside his house protecting him when he turned himself in (before he was charged), and I have heard that "protestors" were stopping multiple food deliveries to his house. Ben Crump, the ambulance chasing attorney representing the family, was calling for Chauvin to get the death penalty I believe before there was any type of medical report on Floyd's death.

If you are right, the root cause of death is really that one person was having to train two new Police officers. Cutting police funding is only going to cause more of these types of situations, not less.

There are two ways to choke some one out. You can do it by restricting their air supply, or by restricting their blood supply via the carotid arteries in the neck. Cutting off the blood supply is generally considered the safer of the two choices as the trachea can be collapsed and will inhibit breathing even after pressure is removed. When you are flat on your stomach, your head is turned, thus pressure applied to the "back" of the neck is actually to the sides, pinching off these arteries.

When combined with the methamphetamines, fentanyl, existing cardiac issues, and COVID infection, there are a lot of other very serious contributing factors to his death. Many police forces have banned any kind of choking type holds for this reason, but Minneapolis police explicitly trained to use this technique.

Other related news:

"One former nightclub coworker tells CBS News the two men “bumped heads.”"

https://twitter.com/CBSEveningNews/status/1270485898585690112

You're showing the fine print for the entire ActBlue website, which includes language for donations made specifically to the PAC fund.

The funds from ActBlue Charities don't go into the PAC. The PAC funds come from donations made specifically to the ActBlue PAC fund (not the charity).

https://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/actblue-charities/


I find this to be quite sensible. However, my question to you is, do you really think Floyd needed a knee to the neck for 8 minutes after falling to the ground while handcuffed? Was he really fighting the cops at that point?

 NO.  When the fight stops, the force stops. But you always need to be ready to re-engage. As they often start fighting again after a break.

But you don't know if that knee applied downward pressure, or was just there as a reminder to Floyd that he shouldn't try to get up.

With excited delirium, the rule is 'contain and restrain' til EMS arrives and can sedate.

I highly doubt Floyd "fell to the ground while handcuffed."  More likely that he fought and resisted until the cops took him to the ground. Taking a combative criminal to the ground is standard control techniques. Once on the ground, they needed to control him til EMS arrived.  But they failed by keeping him on his belly. That's a big no-no due to positional asphyxiation. The knee looks bad, but I'm still putting my money on a different cop as the real killer.  The cop that was on his back, preventing rise and fall of the chest cavity, making breathing increasingly difficult as time progressed, until respiratory arrest set in.  
   Knee-in-neck cop had probably done that same thing a dozen times before without issue.  And I'd be willing to bet he seemed so dis-interested in Floyd's comments, because he felt he wasn't applying any pressure, and didn't know the cop to his right, on Floyd's back, was killing him.  (Just a theory)

In the security camera footage, it doesn't like he is being at all combative, but its hard to say for sure why he went to the ground here (watch this video from about 5:20 until the end):

https://youtu.be/VDd5GlrgvsE?t=320

I don't think he ever got back up off the ground after this, but I could be mistaken.

In any case, I appreciate your sensible viewpoints and its good to get some insight into the matter that the rest of us don't necessarily consider.

In this case it doesn't matter, since there are videos and websites coming out that show how it was all a faked, staged act, anyway. Whenever it happens this way or that, it has to be judged case by case.

8)

[/quote]

In this case it doesn't matter, since there are videos and websites coming out that show how it was all a faked, staged act, anyway. Whenever it happens this way or that, it has to be judged case by case.

8)
[/quote]
I agree with you. I also thought about the staging. Again, everything happens for some reason, and the destruction that the demonstrators caused is also needed for something. I don’t know whose machinations this is, how it coincided that elections and such events are coming soon.