Chauvin's History

[pixie374]

I don't think I've seen anything further about him here. But it was interesting that on AB, the past of the victim seemed more important than the past of the perpetrator..

With 18 complaints plus disciplinaries for violent behaviour behind him.... has anyone changed their mind (or willing to admit) that if you give a violent control freak too much power, they will abuse it?

https://www-independent-co-uk.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/george-floyd-death-derek-chauvin-case-b1725071.html?amp=&amp_gsa=1&amp_js_v=a6&usqp=mq331AQHKAFQArABIA%3D%3D#amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&aoh=16197785913388&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.independent.co.uk%2Fnews%2Fworld%2Famericas%2Fgeorge-floyd-death-derek-chauvin-case-b1725071.html

[naomi24]

AH, I know what you believe. You've told us.

[Peter Pedant]

// I haven’t changed my mind. The outcome of the trial was as I expected - a matter of political expediency rather than justice.//

another expectation contrary to fact. Juries are notoriously independent - that is why dictators do without them, durr.

Instances - are the Ponting case - jury failed to convict. Secrets law was changed after that. Americans call it jury nullification - we dont. We call it a travesty.

"The judge fined the jury for contempt of court for returning a verdict contrary to their own findings of fact and removed them to prison " Few years ago - 1689 The case that Penn of Pennsylvania was involved in
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bushel%27s_Case

case came up when a jury failed to convict on the instruction of a judge because - - - they thought he was not guilty ( manslaughter not his fault)

ho hum - bank holiday on AB I observe

[andy-hughes]

Naomi - //
AH, I know what you believe. You've told us. //

If you know, then there is no need to confirm the fact, any more than there is need to assume that you are spokesperson for the AB - with your 'You told us'.

Anyone can read or not read anything I post, and make up their own mind - they don't require unsolicited adjudication from you.

Any danger of you addressing the point made, so we can get the thread back on track?

[naomi24]

AH, the thread isn't off track - and I've said all I have to say at the moment.

[royfromaus]

hughes
roy - // Scumbag killed by a scumbag. //

A somewhat simplistic view in my opinion.

Only one of the 'scumbags' was an individaul charged with upholding the law as his profession.
___________________________________

http://www.mynewoldself.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/so....jpg
you think one of the individuals wasn't a scumbag then.

[andy-hughes]

naomi - // AH, the thread isn't off track - and I've said all I have to say at the moment. //

Again, no need to announce your absence, anyone who is bothered either way will notice, and either care, or not.

[naomi24]

AH, you addressed two posts to me directly and asked me to comment. Courteously I responded to you. I don't see a problem with that - but if you do, tough.

[andy-hughes]

roy - // ... you think one of the individuals wasn't a scumbag then. //

That is not what I said, as you clearly understand, hence your witty image insert.

I don't necessarily agree with the word 'scumbag', but as I said, one should not be within a country mile of bad behaviour of any sort.

[fcc]

andy-hughes,if you think a man in handcuffs can do no harm ,check out what happened in croydon to a police custody sergeant.

[andy-hughes]

fcc - // andy-hughes,if you think a man in handcuffs can do no harm ,check out what happened in croydon to a police custody sergeant. //

That has absolutely nothing to do with the point I made.

The croydon prisoner was left standing at all times, and had access to the concealed weapon he was carrying.

Mr Floyd was placed on the ground, and my point was, and is, that a handcuffed man cannot easily regain his feet, certainly not fast enough not to be restrained by any of the officers standing around.

There was, and is, no need further to retrain a handcuffed individual by kneeling on their neck, with the rresults we have all seen.

[tomus42]

//Floyd was never unconscious.//

I think he was after he died.

[fcc]

andy-hughes,at 16:29 you said a man in handcuffs could do no harm,
the guy in croydon was handcuffed and killed someone.

[andy-hughes]

fcc - // andy-hughes,at 16:29 you said a man in handcuffs could do no harm,
the guy in croydon was handcuffed and killed someone. //

No, what I actually said was - // ... a handcuffed man cannot easily get to his feet, much less start causing trouble - as much trouble as you can cause without use of your hands - without being easily restrained. //

The point I am making is that a man who is prone on the ground cannot easily get to his feet and then cause trouble without easily being retrained by officers in attendence.

The issue is not that Mr Floyd was handcuffed, but that he was prone and handcuffed, whic is an entirely different situation.

If you want to re-read my full answer, and thereby understand the point I am making, and not edit out the bit that doesn't suit your comparison - feel free - it's just at the top of this page.

[pixie374]

Fcc, if he was unconscious for 3.5 minutes and then dead. How much threat do you think he was?

[andy-hughes]

If you watch any of the plethora of police reality shows, and observe someone who has been taken to the ground and then handcuffed, in every single case, without exception, the individal is helped to his feet by at least two officers.

There is a very good reason for that, trying to get to your feet with your hands cuffed behind your back is almost impossible without assistance.