George Floyd trial,could you make a case for the defendant not being guilty of the charges?

From what I've been hearing from legal experts, the prosecution needs to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Chauvin's actions were a substantial factor in the death of George Floyd, not the factor. The defense just needs to cast reasonable doubt on if Chauvin's actions contributed to the death of Floyd. That seems like a hard sell, but all it takes is one juror to believe that Chauvin's actions were in no way, a contributing factor.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

If the prosecution needs to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Chauvin's actions were a substantial factor in the death of George Floyd then the defense doesn't have to show that Chauvin's action were in no way a contributing factor. That's not even logical.

They have to show that Chauvin's actions weren't a substantial factor in the death of George Floyd (which is still a hard sell).

 

They do it just as often to white people as well. Just look at the statistic. That's why I can't take you seriously. This is a police problem. It's not a race problem.

 

Oops, sorry - that’s what I meant. Not enough caffeine today. -_-

 

What proof would you need to support that there’s a potentially systemic racism problem within our police departments? I agree that part of the problem is a police training issue.

 

You show that statistically more blacks than whites are treated that way. They numbers show that more unarmed whites are killed by police than blacks. There are more whites in the general population but blacks are over-represented in the violent crime stats so there doesn't appear to be a significate racial component.

Police don't treat criminals very well and they treat struggling, running, resisting offenders even worse.

Look at it another way, how do police treat black businessmen, professionals, people who aren't resisting and fighting? They same way the treat white people who react the same. It's not about race generally.

There are plenty of black cops in most police departments. They react generally the same way that their white coworkers react.

The concept of "systemic racism" has been overused/abused. The narrative goes, even if everyone I come into contact with doesn't treat me in a racist way the system still is racist.

When you've progressed to the point where you can say that, racism isn't anywhere near the top of the list of things that are affecting your life in any substantial way.

When you can't think of a way to show systemic racism in a police department, or elsewhere, maybe one should move on to other "problems"? Clearly giving most any high school grad who wants a job as a cop a badge and a gun is not a good idea and we shouldn't be surprised at the way it turns out.

On the other hand we shouldn't condone people like Bells who are racist and who constantly use that label on anyone who is white and with whom she disagrees with.

Just because the cause of the day on TV and elsewhere is "racism" doesn't mean that it's true. Look at the history of racism in this country. It was a legal fact until the 60's. Now the culture and the results are constantly improving.

Before BLM for instance, most people would have agreed that we've come a long way regarding racial issues in the U.S. Suddenly you would think that there must be a large upswing in racism in this country.

Is that your experience and impression? At work do you see your black coworkers treated any differently? Do you treat them differently? Do they treat you differently? Do you treat your black friends differently? No, of course not.

Tell that to Bells though and you will be called a white supremist. That's racism.

 

So that whole argument hinges upon you uncritically accepting bureaucratic whitewashing? Really?
Government bean counting is not the same as what actual Americans think. Why, does everything your government does reflect the thinking of a majority of Aussies?

Anyway, that guy surrendered after being shot in the leg. See, the "white" guy was shot.

Being on the other side is in the line of fire, where any missed shot would jeopardize the officer. Was the passenger window down? Because tasers can't break automotive windows.

Murdy called the Harford County 911 center himself around 8:30 p.m. to say he wanted to surrender, according to authorities. Officials said he spoke with crisis negotiators and came out of the home without further incident.
https://patch.com/maryland/belair/harford-deputy-ambush-ends-attempted-murder-charge


Only this Dec. 2 traffic stop, for speeding in Delaware County, ended peacefully.
...
Sean Maloney, a criminal defense attorney who represents the Buckeye Firearms Association agreed, but said such restraint too easily could have ended in gunfire.

Maloney said that Burr likely didn't know state law when he told officers that his gun was visible and therefore not concealed.
https://www.dispatch.com/story/news...ped-speeding-dec-2-had-loaded-gun/3827075001/​

The first was a standoff, where it would have been risky for police to breach, but he surrendered. Not easy to just shoot or tase someone who's barricaded or behind sufficient cover. Especially when you don't know what innocent bystanders may be about. IOW, no opportunity, so it's irrelevant cherry-picking.
In the second, officer experience with criminals versus ignorant civilians likely played a factor. A criminal would know the law, and wouldn't be playing that game. It ended peacefully.
No idea why you keep saying "not shot or tased". Neither was Floyd, so it's anyone's guess how you imagine these cases are relevant. Where's the drugged up white guy with positional asphyxia?

Oh right, I already posted two of them ages ago: http://sciforums.com/threads/george...lty-of-the-charges.164217/page-7#post-3671646
No criminal charges filed against the officers in two strikingly similar situations to Floyd's, including cause of death findings, but the victims were both white. That blows your sorry cherry-picking out of the water.

See the aforementioned post for two direct comparisons to Floyd's: http://sciforums.com/threads/george...lty-of-the-charges.164217/page-7#post-3671646
The white guys don't get charges pressed against the officers.

Speaking of the cctv footage seen by the dispatcher, you didn't notice how Chauvin was pushed back suddenly and had to lean forward with his body weight to try to keep Floyd in the car? If not, just more of the many things you seem to completely miss.

What part of "the officers likely didn't know where the ambulance was" don't you understand?

Please learn to read. I didn't excuse anything. In fact, I actually said "that cop wrongly detained the filming man". Hint, that's the opposite of excusing it.
I also told you that the motorcyclist wasn't in custody, so it doesn't refute what I said earlier (hence bullshit), about police not leaving an arrested person unsecured. Try to pay attention.

I can't help it if you don't understand how muscles and body weight work. The cctv footage seen by the dispatcher you cited clearly shows Chauvin struggle to keep Floyd in the car. I can't help it if you're blind and you were duped by the prosecution conflating when the officers decided to quit trying to fight to get Floyd in the car, and laid him down like he asked them to. Remember, guy whining about claustrophobia?

 

I have some idea how clueless you are about the realities of policing.
Crowds have been increasingly attacking police since 2016.

You obviously have no idea how muscles, body weight, or even simple reasoning works. You don't try to yank someone out of car to immediately try to shove them back in.

So, if a black person doesn't think like most other black people, they're racist (self-loathing blacks)?
If so, are you telling me blacks are less capable of independent thought than whites? I don't believe it, but if that's your lived experience, who am I to argue.

You do know that the original Uncle Tom martyred himself to save others from slavery, right?
And you need to pay attention to more than clickbait. Blacks were better under Jim Crow, but only in specific ways, like more intact families and less children outside of marriage. You know, protective factors against a life a crime. It is a sad fact that I can understand you wanting to avoid.

I don't have to deny racism in myself when I can just keep pointing to yours. No, I have zero black friends. I don't have much in common with blacks, but then I don't have much in common with most whites either.

So far, all your little quibbles about her have been vacuous. Just a pissy little leftist regurgitating the usual leftist crap.

Wow, you're so twisted up about Owens that you didn't realize that had nothing to do with her.
Again, learn the difference between the medical finding of homicide and the criminal charge.

I can't help it if you're blind.

There's a history of you making up pure bullshit to justify your own racist tendency.
And again, learn how to read simple English. I already corrected your failing comprehension once.

That picture was the cherry-picking. You did not limit those two flags accompanying each other only by white supremacists. Now, maybe that was your intent, but you failed to communicate it. Yes, everyone can go look for themselves.

So are you now tell me that you agree that not all Confederate flag wavers are racist? That's what it would take for your post to not be a hasty generalization. So take your pick.

How does that have anything to do with white posters? It didn't say, "can white people make the case for his innocence". And I gave you an example of a black person who does, and your only comeback was the "no true Scotsman" fallacy. It just somehow doesn't count, just because you say so. That's bullshit, and any adult should be able to recognize that.

You're a racist if you insist that a person's skin color alone makes them bad people or their opinion automatically invalid. Period.
All people, of any race, should be capable of disagreement on any subject. To deny that denies that some race is capable of independent thought. Are you?

 

Clinical dead = possiblity of being revived

If CLINICAL dead longer than 5 minutes probably brain dead and if so = dead

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I think that within various sectors of society, systemic racism exists. Perhaps, you may think that systemic racism requires each person or most people within a given sector (in this case, police departments across the US) to be racist. (or somewhat) That they're all individually racist, bigoted and need to demonstrate outward traits of prejudice against blacks. One doesn't need to be racist him/herself in order to be part of systemic racism. Systemic racism doesn't mean that in every instance, whites will be favored over minorities. It's rather the totality of all the moving parts (of society - education, policing, corporate America, etc) working together - and not the individual parts, necessarily - if that makes sense?

As an example, here are two insightful articles about the growing racial disparity regarding prison terms between blacks and whites.

https://www.themarshallproject.org/2019/12/03/the-growing-racial-disparity-in-prison-time

https://news.gsu.edu/research-magazine/spring2020/incarceration

I think if we want to know about a particular topic, we have to be willing to toss some of our skepticism aside, and seek it out. I don't believe that in every business, university, police department, etc that racism is pervasive, but it has continued on as an embedded mindset, within the American culture. Perhaps due to the lingering effects of racism from years past.

I'm a donor to something known as the Innocence Project - a non-profit organization that helps to exonerate wrongfully convicted people, who have often been serving life terms for crimes they didn't commit. Most of the stories that come across my email, are of black and Latino men (70% totaled together). What should we make of that? To your point, there have been a lot of strides made to end systemic racism, but research shows that it's still pervasive in our culture. You and I don't experience it because we're white, but I've noticed it in the business world. Corporate charts across hundreds of companies with annual revenues of $1 billion and up mainly have white male C-level management, with very few blacks even in management, at all. (VP's, SVP's etc) Take a look sometimes, and you'll see that top level management in most publicly traded high revenue companies, are white men. It's a reality, and no matter how many companies post their BLM banners on their websites to show solidarity, org charts still stay the same.

When we hear the phrase ''white privilege,'' it shouldn't be offensive - it simply means that if you're white, the color of your skin hasn't caused you to suffer discrimination. This doesn't mean that white people don't have struggles, depression, challenges, etc but those struggles aren't stemming from others' prejudice of them as a race.

Although, I've been reading how white men are beginning to feel discriminated against, in light of recent tensions.

That might be a topic for another time.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I like the work that the Innocent Project does. Most of those cases were from years ago, DNA is a great thing for an innocent person and many of those past cases did involve actual racism.

I think there is enough direct evidence of racism in individual cases to not have to stretch so far with "systemic racism".

You aren't ever going to have a level playing field regarding class issues and economics. All you can try to do is to start with equality of opportunity under the law. We have that.

When you say that people (overall) aren't racist but that the system is racist...that actually doesn't make sense. What is really being said is that if someone is born in a lower economic class household then they may not have the advantages of expectations for higher education, roll models who have done well to try to emulate, opportunities to get summer jobs, etc.

That's not racism (systemic or otherwise) IMO. That's just a fact that there will always be those with more or less advantages in life. The Bell Curve will always apply to any group. Education does seem to be the best way out of a lower economic class life but not everyone will have the discipline to make that choice but over time more and more do.

100 years from now there will be more middle and upper class black members and yet there will still be a lower economic class (black and white) that have too many kids, do drugs, commit crimes, etc.

When the percentage of white and black are equally represented in the lowest economic class will that disadvantage that we are speaking of still be termed "systemic racism"? I don't think so. That would make no sense.

I think no one should be going to prison unless their crime was one of violence or at least it should be on their 2nd, 3rd offenses if they are just turning into a serial car thief (for example). Most non-violent offenders should be on house arrest and have 2 year enrollment in some community service (as an example). White or black.

 

I should place a disclaimer at the top of my lengthier posts -- that this post may not be finished, come back in a few minutes. lol I tend to edit, reword, etc. I should probably type a rough draft in Word, then copy and paste.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I do the same thing. I do a quick read over/edit and then press the send button. I read it again and catch a few typos. I read it again and add a few more thoughts to complete what I was actually thinking.

 

I'll return to the rest of your post, but wanted to snip this and reply.

I didn't say that people overall aren't racist - I stated that one doesn't need to be (personally) racist to be a part of systemic racism. Using Chauvin as an example - he may not be racist himself (we don't know), but he's part of a system that for years, has behaved as such. So, perhaps he believed that no matter how he conducted himself the day of Floyd's death, his credibility wouldn't be called into question because he's white. (while being in an authoritative role)

I've been reading a common reaction from mainly whites re: Floyd's death ''well, if you don't want to be pushed to the ground, don't break the law.'' But, as can be heard from prosecution witnesses, there should be a level of force appropriate for the alleged crime in question. Excessive force used and a suspect dies over an alleged counterfeit twenty dollar bill? I say alleged, because Floyd may not have known that was counterfeit. If we are to presume Chauvin is innocent until proven guilty, we should apply the same principle to suspects under arrest, no?

It goes without saying that police work is tough - I wouldn't want to touch strangers all day, let alone they grab me. Nope. So, much respect goes out to those who are respectful members of their communities, and try to keep it safe. But, this doesn't mean that we can't work together towards reform. Nothing will ever be perfect, but it needs to get better.

 

If you cannot show an instance of racism happening, what you describe is a boogeyman. It's a conspiracy theory, where many things secretly work together for nefarious purposes, but there's no actual evidence.

For greater crimes with longer sentences, sentencing is often decided by a jury. Addressing "the system" will not change the fact that people are inherently biased.
There's also evidence that lenience on lesser crimes leads to higher sentences for greater crimes.

Believe all women? That sort of suspension of skepticism usually leads to people being denied due process and them being presumed guilty. Bias means that you are more likely to find anything you seek out, just because you're intent on seeking it out and dismiss contradictory info.

The boogeyman of discrimination is a running excuse to not take responsibility for one's own actions.

 

Agreed 100%. All you have to do is stand by while someone else is racist, thinking "well, nothing I can do so I'm just going to stay out of it." If enough people do that, then the few true racists we do have enable a racist society, where their actions are unopposed.

The concept of the "active bystander" is relevant here, and is the opposite side of the coin. If racism isn't tolerated by bystanders, then it cannot become part of society. In this case, the active bystanders could not save Floyd's life - but they were able to capture the video that led to his indictment. They do have power.

 

I didn't mean that you (specifically) don't make sense, by the way. I was pointing out that IMO when systemic racism is defined the way that it is commonly defined...it really doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

I understand that there can be racism in society even though every person isn't racist but I've heard it defined so that no one can be racist and there's still systemic racism. Since it's been eliminated by law and if it's eliminated in actual people then there's nothing left for systemic racism to hang it's hat on.

At that point it's similar to someone who just wants to be offended because life isn't "fair".

If Cauvin feels entitled as a cop, that's what needs to be fixed with the police in our country. I see no need to call it systemic racism because the statistics show that cops act that way to everyone who acts like that to them.

If the police aren't abusing the black middle class then it's not really systemic racism is it?