Forgery suspect killed by cop restricting his airway

[Deepak]

Looking at these categories, I'm concerned that the prosecutors may not be able to make a good case for second-degree murder -- deliberate but unplanned homicide. At the very least they ought to charge Officer Derek Chauvin with manslaughter -- negligent homicide. That is because DC's lawyer may argue that his client had no idea that he was going to kill George Floyd, that all his client wanted to do is knock out GF so that he would be less troublesome.

I'm trying to think like some sleazy lawyer.

I think that the prosecution ought to have negligent homicide as a fallback charge.

This is always an included lesser charge for a murder offense

Except some people have walked in high profile cases from a lack of such a fallback.

Which ones? I'm not talking about cases where there was an acquittal and the right-wing-blogosphere was saying 'overcharge', but specific cases where the a lesser charge was unavailable

 

[Arctish]

Pretty sure that's third degree murder you are describing: killing unintentionally while assaulting someone with the intent to inflict harm (among other things). Maybe you had your charges reversed; it's 3rd degree murder, and second degree assault you describe.

Is this addressed to me?

I'm using the text from Minnesota law I linked to in this post.

Third degree assault = Inflicting substantial bodily harm or one of the other offenses listed.

Second degree murder = Causing someone’s death without intending the death of anyone, while committing a felony other than criminal sexual conduct, or one of the other offenses listed.

 

[lpetrich]

Murkowski Endorses Mattis Criticism of Trump, Calling it ‘Necessary and Overdue’ - The New York Times - "The Alaska Republican suggested the former defense secretary’s scathing remarks might serve as a tipping point, prodding other Republicans to go public with longstanding concerns about President Trump."

I'll take her seriously when she pushes for something with bite, like impeachment or the 25th Amendment or the Republican leadership selecting someone other than him as their candidate at the convention or campaigning for the Democratic candidate.

Lisa Murkowski: GOP senator says she's 'struggling' on whether to back Trump - CNNPolitics

"I was really thankful. I thought General Mattis' words were true, and honest and necessary and overdue," Murkowski said. "And, I have been struggling for the right words, and I was encouraged a couple of nights ago when I was able to read what President Bush had written. And I found that to be empowering for me as one leader."

Trump’s latest eruption just showed that Jim Mattis is entirely right - The Washington Post
Someone very prominent ought to call him a big baby. Let's see if he can rebut that without justifying that criticism.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I was very relieved to hear that the charges were upgraded to 2nd degree murder. I've been explaining to friends all week that that would be the most appropriate charge, given the circumstances. I looked up all the different degrees of murder in Minnesota and 2nd degree murder seems the best. Of course, the other police needed to be charged as well. Manslaughter seems to fit in those cases. I explained to a black friend of mine that it would be impossible to prove 1st digress murder, as there is really no evidence that this was premeditated. I hope that justice will finally be served when this goes to trial. So many police have gotten off after killing unarmed black men.

Are you hoping he's going to walk? Because that's how you get him off. We've seen it again and again--high profile wrongdoing, overcharge, they walk because they're not guilty of what was overcharged.

2nd degree requires intent to kill but not premeditation. I see no reason to think he intended anything more than pain. Manslaughter.

Actually doesn’t third require malice and second requires ‘just’ a felony.

Third is oops. 2nd requires intent, although that can be the intent to commit another felony. We have no other felony here. This is manslaughter.

 

[repoman]

How many stars did Floyd work up to at his max?

This corporate virtue signaling is getting out of control

 

[Loren Pechtel]

And how is your point established? Failing to check doesn't prove intent. He applied some pain, when the guy complained he applied more pain and he apparently got the message and shut up. Wrong, but this doesn't show an intent to kill.

Failure to yeild during a possibility of fatal action implies intent to continue.

Intent to continue what, though? I don't think he intended anything more than pain.

 

[Jarhyn]

Pretty sure that's third degree murder you are describing: killing unintentionally while assaulting someone with the intent to inflict harm (among other things). Maybe you had your charges reversed; it's 3rd degree murder, and second degree assault you describe.

Is this addressed to me?

I'm using the text from Minnesota law I linked to in this post.

Third degree assault = Inflicting substantial bodily harm or one of the other offenses listed.

Second degree murder = Causing someone’s death without intending the death of anyone, while committing a felony other than criminal sexual conduct, or one of the other offenses listed.

From that link. First sentence:

Second-degree murder is an intentional killing

The statute for third degree murder perfectly describes the situation:

Whoever, without intent to effect the death of any person, causes the death of another by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life, is guilty of murder in the third degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 25 years.

This event literally checks off every single box.

Caused the death of another (George Floyd died)'
Perpetrating an act dangerous to others (kneeling on their neck as they struggle to breath),
And evincing a depraved mind (people were begging him to stop),
Without regard for human life (people asked him to check Floyd's vitals, including the other officers, and he refused),
IS GUILTY of murder in the third degree.

There are plenty of arguments against "assault" or "intent to kill". But third degree is slam dunk.

 

[lpetrich]

Bryan Llenas on Twitter: "Breaking: ..." / Twitter

Breaking: NYS Judge James Burke rules NYPD can now keep anyone (peaceful protestors arrested for curfew and criminal looters) detained for over 24 hours given these are extraordinary times. “It’s a crisis within a crisis", he said. "All writs are denied, BK, BX and manhattan"

NYPD argued for need of “extreme measures to maintain order,” “majority were for burglary and looting"... "these are unprecedented times", there is "rage against the police department". These people have been "throwing bricks at police officers", "slashing officers".

NYPD attorney admitted that because of the volume of arrests, social distancing has not always been possible, but that they have been given soap and masks.
"I won't call them protesters, I'll call them rioters".

Legal aid argued that per NY law people cannot be detained without seeing a judge for over 24 hours and that these people are "mainly protesters" for being "against police brutality."

Legal Aid Marlen Bodden slammed the NYPD for holding detainees for more than 24 hours.

“They have no excuse for not processing them”. "The reason they are doing it is because the people are protesting police brutality.”

Per producer @MartaDhanis

Judge Burke ruled with NYPD because of COVID-19.

"Therefore, I find it is necessary because we are in a crisis caused by the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic which prevents live arraignments, which in turn requires virtual arraignment which causes delay.”

Judge Burke, per @MartaDhanis went on to back up his ruling by saying given covid-19 “it is simply a fact that virtual parts slow down pace of arraignments including but not limited to because of technical issues and because certainly because of increased volume.”

The Legal Aid Society on Twitter: "We strongly disagree with this ruling.
As of 6 PM tonight, 160 NYers citywide remain in custody 24+ hours after their arrest, which is some progress, but 160 NYers too many.
We'll continue to monitor this situation and we are ready to appeal if necessary.https://t.co/QTN3KOWdcl" / Twitter

Saikat Chakrabarti on Twitter: "“New York State Suspends Habeas Corpus” should probably be bigger news right now?" / Twitter

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter: "Civil liberties protect ourselves from governments using “crises” and “emergencies” as justification to dismantle our rights.
This is suspension of habeus corpus, it is unconstitutional, and it is deeply disturbing that both NYPD is seeking it and a judge rubber stamped it." / Twitter

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter: "How injustices compound: Many protestors are people who‘ve lost health insurance during COVID.
After being beaten, tear gassed, or badly hurt, many are afraid to seek medical care to check for bleeds, fractures, or head injuries because they are newly uninsured." / Twitter

 

[Arctish]

From that link. First sentence:

Second-degree murder is an intentional killing

The statute for third degree murder perfectly describes the situation:

Whoever, without intent to effect the death of any person, causes the death of another by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life, is guilty of murder in the third degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 25 years.

I agree Chauvin appears to be guilty of third degree murder. That's pretty much a given. But I think there is enough evidence of second degree murder to support that charge along the lines of 'felony murder'. And I'm pretty sure we haven't seen everything the Prosecution has.

 

[lpetrich]

About my previous post, right-wingers often say that civil liberties are criminals' rights and therefore must be abolished, but when they are suspected of anything, they act like card-carrying members of the ACLU.

Pramila Jayapal on Twitter: "Militarized police presences will only make the problem worse — it’s time to focus on policies that dismantle racism, white supremacy, and anti-Blackness." / Twitter
noting
The Seattle Times on Twitter: "The Washington State Patrol issued an apology after video surfaced of an officer telling his team, “Don’t kill them, but hit them hard,” while preparing to clear protesters from the streets in Seattle’s Capitol Hill on Tuesday evening. (via @c_clarridge) https://t.co/hzV2azQva4" / Twitter

Pramila Jayapal on Twitter: "Trump took far more aggressive action against those protesting racism, white supremacy, and anti-Blackness than he ever did against COVID-19.
This tells us a lot about the guy—and makes it all the more urgent that we defeat him." / Twitter

 

[Jarhyn]

From that link. First sentence:

The statute for third degree murder perfectly describes the situation:

I agree Chauvin appears to be guilty of third degree murder. That's pretty much a given. But I think there is enough evidence of second degree murder to support that charge. And I'm pretty sure we haven't seen everything the Prosecution has.

The issue being that 2nd is not a necessary charge, and is a bar set, potentially, too high. We have incontrovertible proof of 3rd degree; we can pin him to the wall.and he'll be going away.

Qualified immunity can clear the officers if they can't positively rule out that Floyd resisted in some way, and that his restraint was lawful.

The fortunate part in this case is that Ellison started with a third degree charge, and ADDED a second degree charge to it; so even if he gets cleared of second, he still has to face the slam dunk third degree charge

 

[lpetrich]

Brad Heath on Twitter: "Barr says there was "no correlation" between his decision to clear Lafayette Square and the president's walk through the park a few minutes later." / Twitter
then
Kamala Harris on Twitter: "I invite Bill Barr to say this in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee—under oath." / Twitter
Under threat of perjury charges.

Kamala Harris on Twitter: "History will remember that on this day—the day of George Floyd's funeral—Senator @RandPaul rejected our anti-lynching legislation and attempted to water it down. It's absolutely disgraceful. https://t.co/GDbKsJngDU" / Twitter

Kamala Harris on Twitter: "8 minutes and 46 seconds of silence this morning. In those last moments of his life, George Floyd called for his late mother and said he could not breathe.
This is why we fight. https://t.co/yy6lrNBQz0" / Twitter

Kamala Harris on Twitter: "No longer can people wait on the sidelines, hoping for incremental change to address the systemic racism that has plagued our country since its earliest days.
In times like this, silence is complicity. Read my op-ed. https://t.co/kXn8KrdWbe" / Twitter
Kamala Harris Explains Why She Protests With Black Lives Matter - "Senator Harris on marching, listening, and making change."

This week, something historic happened. Thousands of people from every walk of life, every state across the country, came together. Many felt feelings of anger, sadness, fear, and hopelessness following George Floyd’s killing. But we all felt the urgency for change.

Change in the name of George Floyd. Change in the name of Ahmaud Arbery. Change in the name of Breonna Taylor. And change in the name of the countless other Black Americans who have died at the hands of hatred and racism.

This past weekend, I joined thousands of protestors in Washington, D.C. as we marched through the streets to demand justice for George Floyd.

Kamala Harris on Twitter: "We urgently need an investigation and a Judiciary Committee hearing on Bill Barr reportedly ordering peaceful protesters to be forcibly cleared out near the White House earlier this week.
I’m introducing an amendment to make that happen. https://t.co/qdCrgiwOWN" / Twitter

Kamala Harris is surprisingly good here. She was once a district attorney and an Attorney General, but here, she's good on civil liberties.

 

[ZiprHead]

From that link. First sentence:

The statute for third degree murder perfectly describes the situation:

I agree Chauvin appears to be guilty of third degree murder. That's pretty much a given. But I think there is enough evidence of second degree murder to support that charge along the lines of 'felony murder'. And I'm pretty sure we haven't seen everything the Prosecution has.

That is correct. The prosecution also has bodycam evidence that has not yet been release. Keith Ellison said he does not know when that will be released.

 

[Jarhyn]

From that link. First sentence:

The statute for third degree murder perfectly describes the situation:

I agree Chauvin appears to be guilty of third degree murder. That's pretty much a given. But I think there is enough evidence of second degree murder to support that charge along the lines of 'felony murder'. And I'm pretty sure we haven't seen everything the Prosecution has.

That is correct. The prosecution also has bodycam evidence that has not yet been release. Keith Ellison said he does not know when that will be released.

What I find most supportive of the possibility of second degree is the absence of Chauvin's body camera. As can be reasonably ascertained from the footage we have seen, he wasn't wearing one.

 

[Metaphor]

As I said, I'll provide my studies when you provide two things a commitment to changing your view on the basis of evidence, and evidence to support your own view not based off of of already-suspect arrest statistics.

I asked you very specific questions which you have not answered.

Will you accept the National Crime Victimization Survey as a source?

Now, as for your stipulations: I change my mind when I am presented with good evidence that I should believe something different. I think you should make the same commitment.

Calling arrest data "already suspect" is begging the question, but in any case my view was not informed by arrest data in the first place.

 

[lpetrich]

The fortunate part in this case is that Ellison started with a third degree charge, and ADDED a second degree charge to it; so even if he gets cleared of second, he still has to face the slam dunk third degree charge

Good that he has some fallback, some easier-to-prove charge.

Rep. Ro Khanna on Twitter: "The irony of Trump’s decision to encourage police violence at peaceful protests specifically marching against that exact violence is dumbfounding. https://t.co/fhT8tlX7DC" / Twitter

Justin Amash on Twitter: "What is qualified immunity?
What are the problems with it?
How does our new bill address it?
Please read and share. #EndQI https://t.co/d57XYo1lp4" / Twitter
It still hasn't shown up in congress.gov, though JA has also announced that it has been getting cosponsors.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

As I said, I'll provide my studies when you provide two things a commitment to changing your view on the basis of evidence, and evidence to support your own view not based off of of already-suspect arrest statistics.

I asked you very specific questions which you have not answered.

Will you accept the National Crime Victimization Survey as a source?

Now, as for your stipulations: I change my mind when I am presented with good evidence that I should believe something different. I think you should make the same commitment.

Calling arrest data "already suspect" is begging the question, but in any case my view was not informed by arrest data in the first place.

Why should he commit to do work, if afterward, you will not earnestly accept the studies, but instead be dismissive and political? His computed cost to look up these things, report them, and argue is far higher than a benefit of 0 since you will not agree to rational stipulations. Why should he play your rigged political game?

 

[Jarhyn]

As I said, I'll provide my studies when you provide two things a commitment to changing your view on the basis of evidence, and evidence to support your own view not based off of of already-suspect arrest statistics.

I asked you very specific questions which you have not answered.

Will you accept the National Crime Victimization Survey as a source?

Now, as for your stipulations: I change my mind when I am presented with good evidence that I should believe something different. I think you should make the same commitment.

Calling arrest data "already suspect" is begging the question, but in any case my view was not informed by arrest data in the first place.

So, doing some research on the NCVS, there are already some primary factors which impugn any attempt to correlate the results from such a survey to the subject, that black people are more likely to be criminals than white people: it focuses on who is the victim of perceived crimes, not on who the committed them. If I have one black person in 5 commiting 3 crimes, and one white person in five commiting one crime, those two populations have the same number of criminals. That one commits crimes more frequently than the other due, perhaps, to socioeconomic factors does not establish what you would want it to.

Second, we run into the same reporting bias that cops do: if we have a population more likely to perceive an act as being criminal, or more likely to be agitated by some encounter, we are again confounded.

It also does nothing to address any discussion of victimless or "transactional" crime, which accounts for the vast majority of enforcement disparity.

It also does not speak much to the underlying socioeconomic factors that some people keep trying to bring up that are themselves the result of generational racial bias, and the very structure of certain criminal enterprises is dictated by socioeconomic access: it's easier to sell drugs without having contact with a gang, when you have a bank account, a decent computer, and a college education, and the structure of gang-related drug businesses has a lot higher likelihood of violent contact, albeit with much violence arising out of a very small population, and the ability to be able to sell drugs safely in a violence free environment is pretty much zero when you have ever been arrested or associated with gang activity.

But I digress... While I'm certainly open to reading the study more deeply beyond methodologies, it is already apparent that it is unfit for making any kind of substantive claim of from whom criminal acts originated.

Of course, you still haven't stated whether that is your view, something I was pretty clear that you had an obligation to do.

 

[Shobha]

Exactly !! Socioeconomic status is the variable, not race !

"ItS SoCiOEcOnOmIc!!"

Thanks for the (unnecessary) pronunciation lesson.

Socioeconomic factors in cities fairly tightly correlate with race.

Humans are infamously known for conflating correlation with causation, and using bad "proxies" that are easy to discern in lieu of harder-to-observe underlying causes (you can see when someone is black; you cannot see when someone is poor.). This is the very definition of prejudice and racism.

You can't honestly expect any rational, critically thinking person to buy, given the knowledge of this historically consistent effect, that the effect just magically disappeared from the human psyche.

In fact it has been studied many times and when people in various occupations making decisions on what homes to show or what products to offer, or even asked whether the person they saw is a criminal, even when controlling for socioeconomic factors, sometimes when people are directly aware of socioeconomic factors at the outset, direct black people to lesser "more affordable" options, away from "white neighborhoods", towards shittier products, or impugn them as criminals.

It's almost like when you have such campaigns as "around blacks, never relax", people wil take that to heart no matter how fucking racist that is.

And as it stands, studies indicate that actual criminal acts are committed at roughly equal rates per capital. The correlation people draw mirrors the imbalance in enforcement by cops. It's not that black people commit more crimes, but cops have historically enforced more vigorously against the black community, because the previous generation of cops arrested more black people... And so on, due to momentum carried all the way back to the days of race based slavery.

I am fully aware of the tons of Research behind subconscious bias. I teach it. So again, not sure what the point is

 

[Shobha]

Well here's my response to that claim: Why are Black people crowded in the cities and poorer than Whites on average? The reasons are historic and modern racism. So, if one wants to claim that the proximal cause and differences are due to economics, I will counter that those ALLEGED proximal causes are due to racism as the ROOT cause. And so, it's still racism in that hypothetical that economics is the current variable at play.

Yes, that WAS my point !
When people cite crime rates based on race, they make it racist. When it is actually socioeconomic factors.
Blacks are not more violent and crime prone. Poorer people are. Blacks happen to be poorer than the other races.

And the reason there is more crime in the lower socioeconomic strata is not because poor people are evil. Its because they have far fewer options.