- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Derek Chauvin's defense....
Posted on 6/1/20 at 7:48 am to AUCE05
Posted on 6/1/20 at 7:48 am to AUCE05
quote:
I think he has a very good chance. All hinges on what was happening before the event took place.
No it doesn't. He was subdued and no longer a threat. I don't care if he shot someone just prior to that. It doesn't matter. He was in custody and no longer a threat.
0
Posted on 6/1/20 at 7:48 am to ctiger69
quote:
George Floyd was a criminal with a long history of crime.
still doesn't deserve to die
who are you to say who dies and who lives
Posted on 6/1/20 at 7:48 am to StringedInstruments
quote:
Autopsy says Floyd wasn’t killed solely by the knee-to-neck restraint. The situation called for a restraint. He executed the knee-to-neck restraint as taught by the police academy and protocol allows for the restraint to remain in place until help arrives.
I know a lot of LEO and I've never heard of knee-to-neck being used as a proper restraint. Knee between the shoulder blades, or a hold using a rear naked choke if the situation calls for it. But never a mix of the two. Too much pressure will easily break a neck, I can't imagine any department teaches that as a proper restraint technique.
Posted on 6/1/20 at 7:51 am to JohnnyKilroy
quote:
The autopsy revealed no physical findings that support a diagnosis of traumatic asphyxia or strangulation,"
Going to be hard to convict him of choking him to death when he didn’t die from choking to death.
I’ve seen enough Law & Order to know that.
Posted on 6/1/20 at 7:56 am to JohnnyKilroy
quote:
Matter of fact is you can’t say it if you can’t breathe
quote:Because it helps them look past the fact this piece of shite’s actions contributed to the death of a man in handcuffs
Why do people believe this lol
This post was edited on 6/1/20 at 9:37 am
Posted on 6/1/20 at 8:00 am to Ingeniero
quote:
I know a lot of LEO and I've never heard of knee-to-neck being used as a proper restraint.
Just because you never heard of it doesn’t mean it isn’t true. In fact I bet there are lots of things that are true that you’ve never heard.
USA Today says Knee hold was legal and SOP.
Posted on 6/1/20 at 8:05 am to StringedInstruments
quote:
restraint. The situation called for a restraint. He executed the knee-to-neck restraint as taught by the police academy and protocol allows for the restraint to remain in place until help arrives.
One flaw with your point. What do you consider “help?” 4 officers isn’t enough for one man?
Posted on 6/1/20 at 8:06 am to carguymatt
How would you find a jury who doesn’t know anything about this? Don’t see how it could go to trial and even if so the judge would be biased in order to not have more riots.... if he was found not guilty then you would really see what thugs can do
Posted on 6/1/20 at 8:10 am to MsGarrison
Yeah the people that keep quoting that as a defense aren’t really considering the context
Pretty sure that handcuffed, face down, 4 officers around is not the time for an “unconscious choke” technique
Pretty sure that handcuffed, face down, 4 officers around is not the time for an “unconscious choke” technique
Posted on 6/1/20 at 8:14 am to cssamerican
quote:
An attorney will say he used the non deadly force option as outlined by policy of the police department and that was what he was trained to do.
Without seeing all the video, and with out a complete medical report we don’t know how strong a case he has, but the officers potentially have a very strong defense on what initially looked like a slam dunk case.
Except, well, he died. And all of those approved tactics you quoted, where in there does it say to keep using them even after the person in custody doesn't even have a pulse?
This post was edited on 6/1/20 at 8:19 am
Posted on 6/1/20 at 8:17 am to carguymatt
Benjamin crump will pay some witnesses to say some lying fake shite and then have a fact witness come testify.
Posted on 6/1/20 at 8:18 am to latech15
quote:
The guy absolutely did resist arrest.
but did he resist to a point where Chauvin needed to kneel on his neck for 9 minutes? Was that specific restraint necessary once Floyd was cuffed, face down on the ground? I don't know (and you don't either). That is one thing the evidence will have to address.
but how does Chauvin not get held accountable for the death or contributing to it regardless of Floyd's resistance?
only thing I can see is if toxicology proves Floyd died from some sort of drug he was on. Otherwise, Chauvin is gonna be convicted in some manner.
Posted on 6/1/20 at 8:21 am to Rebel
Fair enough, it looks like the Minneapolis PD manual does allow it. I'm wrong on that part.
However, as noted in this article, there are a few points that are going to condemn the officer:
-the SOP is almost certainly use enough force to gain control. Is it excessive to kneel for 8 minutes on the neck of a man who is handcuffed in a prone position? I think a reasonable person (read: jury) would agree it is.
-the officer was encouraged by his partner to change positions due to the possibility of delirium. Knowing the risks he still continued
-was the officer even trained to perform this technique? This point is only conjecture, but the guy in the article who has run police training for 20 years implies that, while allowable by the manual, MPD teaches knee to shoulder blades rather than knee to neck. If the officer was never properly trained in the method he used, he has no defense since the procedure calls for the subject to be trained in such restraints
However, as noted in this article, there are a few points that are going to condemn the officer:
-the SOP is almost certainly use enough force to gain control. Is it excessive to kneel for 8 minutes on the neck of a man who is handcuffed in a prone position? I think a reasonable person (read: jury) would agree it is.
-the officer was encouraged by his partner to change positions due to the possibility of delirium. Knowing the risks he still continued
-was the officer even trained to perform this technique? This point is only conjecture, but the guy in the article who has run police training for 20 years implies that, while allowable by the manual, MPD teaches knee to shoulder blades rather than knee to neck. If the officer was never properly trained in the method he used, he has no defense since the procedure calls for the subject to be trained in such restraints
Posted on 6/1/20 at 8:28 am to Ingeniero
Ok. Now that you agree the knee wasn’t something viscous but an approved technique how are you going to convict on murder when the official cause of death is natural causes?
Things aren’t quite as clear now are they?
Things aren’t quite as clear now are they?
Posted on 6/1/20 at 8:31 am to Rebel
quote:
Things aren’t quite as clear now are they?
Nah they’re still pretty clear.
Posted on 6/1/20 at 8:35 am to Rebel
quote:
Ok. Now that you agree the knee wasn’t something viscous but an approved technique how are you going to convict on murder when the official cause of death is natural causes?
Things aren’t quite as clear now are they?
Because the argument will be that although the technique is permitted in essence, the officer misused it by not following the protocol laid out. If it's required that the technique only be used only to gain control, and that medical attention is required if a detainee expresses the need for it, the officer can be found guilty on account of his negligence.
Also, I'm assuming you're claiming natural causes based on the ME's report. The same report was used as probable cause for arresting the officer and bringing said charges. The same report listed the knee as a contributing factor to the death. The report even notes that officers are trained that the situation he used the technique wasn't applicable. Verbatim:
quote:
The defendant had his knee on Mr. Floyd’s neck for 8 minutes and 46 seconds in total. Two minutes and 53
seconds of this was after Mr. Floyd was non-responsive. Police are trained that this type of restraint with a
subject in a prone position is inherently dangerous.
ETA: so based on all this, you can't say the officer was just using an approved technique and the guy died because he had a heart condition. The misuse of force is what led to the death, or at least that's what will be argued.
This post was edited on 6/1/20 at 8:36 am
Posted on 6/1/20 at 8:37 am to SouthEndzoneTiger
quote:
Except, well, he died
But not from asphyxia or strangulation, per autopsy lol
Posted on 6/1/20 at 8:39 am to Ingeniero
It doesn’t say the knee was a contributing factor.
It says the process of getting arrested.
It specifically says he did not die from suffocation or asphyxia
It says the process of getting arrested.
It specifically says he did not die from suffocation or asphyxia
Posted on 6/1/20 at 8:42 am to StringedInstruments
His hope is that the knee to neck restraint had no direct impact on his death. Especially if his attorney can bring up other examples of successful knee to neck restraints.
I may be close to likely he'll get off from a legal standpoint. Just watch out for second round like Darren Wilson and Ferguson.
I may be close to likely he'll get off from a legal standpoint. Just watch out for second round like Darren Wilson and Ferguson.
Posted on 6/1/20 at 8:45 am to red sox fan 13
Hard to call this guy a “lamb.” He had his knee in Floyd’s neck for almost 3 minutes after he stopped breathing. Sit and watch your clock for three minutes. It’s a long time.
Page 5 of 6
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News