Quote:
Originally Posted by GirlySports
It's all tough to prove.
Cops have some extra defenses, given that part of their job does involve physically subduing people, Which will make a charge even harder to prove.
If four of us tackled a guy and sat on him until he died, there would be no doubt that we all committed a crime. We aren't supposed to be getting physical with anyone. But cops are required by law to arrest people, which means physically restraining them and subduing them if the arrestee resists.
As for the observers, here's the Minnesota aiding and abetting statute.
Failing to aid someone in distress might be a separate crime, but if there is such a thing, I don't think it'd be a serious felony. Especially with the upgrade to second degree murder, it will be very difficult of the state to prove that these other cops intentionally aided in the intentional killing of George Floyd.
|
Just based on the legal comments I shared above, and the excerpt you posted, they are looking to prove they
intentionally aided in the
unintentional killing of George Floyd. That's not much of a stretch based on what we can see.
At the end of the day though, even though some of us imagine ourselves as legal experts (and then inevitably get crushed by MBates bringing real knowledge), I would say comments like "it will be difficult for the state to prove..." etc etc arent really meaningful. The fact is that we don't know, and that the people deciding on these charges are in the business of charging criminals with crimes they can prove. That's not to say they're perfect, but they certainly know more than any of us regarding Minnesota Law, and we should assume they've thought of everything and more than us amateur internet lawyers.
Does that mean this is a lock? Of course not. I just find the tone of "I hope they know what they're doing! that seems tough to me" to be pretty funny, all things considered.