Minneapolis PD Suffocate Unarmed Black Man Who Later Dies in Hospital

[GirlySports]

Just thinking it might be tough to prove. The squad is on duty, professionally trained officers. This isnt 3 civilians not stopping 1 civilian beating on another.

I, as a trained officer, would never think my senior would be that stupid and kill the guy. He's just scaring him. Any moment now, he's going to let go. Right?

That would be my defense. The police culture of not speaking up.

[cam_wmh]

Isn't there concern on Murder 2, that it'll be that much harder to prove? Making a not-guilty judgment, that much more likely?

[dino7c]

They have got to be careful with these charges...I realize people want justice but if any of these guys get off on these charges the current riots will look like a tea party

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Just thinking it might be tough to prove. The squad is on duty, professionally trained officers. This isnt 3 civilians not stopping 1 civilian beating on another.

I, as a trained officer, would never think my senior would be that stupid and kill the guy. He's just scaring him. Any moment now, he's going to let go. Right?

That would be my defense. The police culture of not speaking up.

Certainly a predicament and maybe a sentencing judge would consider it for sentencing purposes, but I don't think it affects culpability when the law is in black and white.

[Snuffleupagus]

Other 3 cops are now charged with aiding and abetting murder.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...yds-death.html

All 4 idiots could get 40 years...but we know they wont.

[JohnnyB]

So all it takes to get charges pressed against 4 police clearly caught on video involved in the murder of a black guy is demonstrations in 350+ cities.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by New Era

Having been on the inside of law enforcement in the US there is a lot of racism involved. A LOT. A disturbing amount to be honest. The narrative of the police being the best and the brightest that society has to offer is just that, a narrative, and a false one at that. The problem is the police are hiring the wrong type of officers and wrong type of personalities.

While I was working on my doctorate I completed an internal study on the history of department I was at and the failure to transition from the professional policing model to a community oriented policing model. The failures were many, but recruitment, training, and forced attrition were the biggest contributors. Senior leadership adopted the appropriate mentality, but they did not fix institutional biases towards certain personalities and change training to prepare offices for the street.

The problem begin at recruitment. The police are on the lookout for people who already have experience with, or the propensity to accept, working in a rigid chain of command, willing to accept and act on orders. This means a lot of ex-military, who are not trained as peace keepers but trained as brunt instruments of violence. For some reason they also look for people with certain skills in combat sport, again leaning toward people with a propensity toward violent confrontation. To make matters worse, the rigidity of the psych profiling was softened so more individuals would get through screening and into the academy, meaning that the process to filter out those with propensities to violence and psychopathic tendencies was eliminated. So now you had to rely on training to change behaviors.

Behavior modification does not happen quickly, and during a high intensity seven to twelve week long academy behavior modification does not happen. While observing the academy it became evident that behavior amplification was happening more so than behavior modeling. Certain personality traits were encouraged, and not those that included compassion, communication, and cooperation. This was where things consistently fell apart. The people who did display the behaviors needed for success in community oriented policing were being filtered out by the training lieutenants and the candidates who displayed a willingness to use controlled violence were passed through. When training regiments are focused primarily on confrontation and means to control those confrontation through uses of non-lethal force (means that can can be used for lethal force if pressed) you put a certain mindset on the street.

Community oriented policing requires people who display behaviors associated with compassion, communication, and cooperation. These are more type B personalities unlike the uber type A personalities that make up most law enforcement organizations. To adapt to this model you need to attract and put more of these type B personalities into the mix, especially in leadership roles. You still need some of those blunt instruments, but they must be led by those who understand and can use compassion, can communicate effectively with their constituents, and then work with the community through a cooperative effort to police the community. There are too many authoritarian LEOs out there, and too many agencies that rely on the "cracking heads" way of doing business. When you couple this with racial bias it becomes a very dangerous mix and what we are seeing around the United States right now.

The bolded part is to me kind of mind-boggling, because one common issue I see with basically all of these US police brutality videos, is just how [B]bad the average US cop seems to be at use of physical force. They are often clearly just pathetically unskilled considering use of force is their job.

Obviously the properly committed takedowns don't get shared in social media as police brutality, but it's still amazing to me. I would actually imagine that's one big reason why they're so prone to go for their guns or tasers. If you know you're about 50/50 to come out on top in a wrestling match, you really need to avoid them.

As I've sometimes mentioned, I drove in a cab in a nightshift in Helsinki for many years, and have seen more than my share of police taking down people for various reasons. Men, women, big guys, drunks, addicts. I've had to call the police to remove an aggressive client a few times. Seeing an experienced patrol officer wrap up a guy coming at them in a second never seizes to impress me.

But of course, every Finnish police officer has trained for years. As a result they're generally super good at what they do. They're also consistently the most trusted profession. (There's a national ranking every year.)

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by dino7c

They have got to be careful with these charges...I realize people want justice but if any of these guys get off on these charges the current riots will look like a tea party

I'd like to think they know what they're doing. I did read this when looking up second-degree murder in Minnesota:

No one remotely familiar with Minnesota law would regard either of those charges (the original, lighter charges) as the right ones to bring in this case — a case where, even if intent cannot be proven, a second-degree felony murder charge, punishable by 40 years in prison, is manifestly justified. Under a quirk in Minnesota law, second-degree murder can be charged where an assault — such as the first-degree assault evident from Chauvin’s placement of his knee on Floyd’s neck for nearly nine minutes — unintentionally results in death.

More critically, anyone steeped in Minnesota law would recognize that the third-degree murder charge would likely be summarily dismissed for the ironic reason that Chauvin clearly aimed his acts at Floyd. Such a miscarriage of justice would surely trigger still more chaos and violence from coast to coast as people across the political spectrum come to see American justice as unworthy of the name.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/05/...floyds-killer/

This article is written by two legal professionals who seem very experienced in criminal law. Their take seems to be that the original charge is actually more difficult to land than the upgraded charge, given the evidence we know.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by cam_wmh

Isn't there concern on Murder 2, that it'll be that much harder to prove? Making a not-guilty judgment, that much more likely?

Can the judge/jury not determine that if the facts don't support murder 2, they can still convict on murder 3? I find it hard to believe that the criminal justice system would use "baseball-style arbitration".

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by JohnnyB

So all it takes to get charges pressed against 4 police clearly caught on video involved in the murder of a black guy is demonstrations in 350+ cities.

Chances seem likely they wouldn't if there wasn't an uprising but we will never know.

Now how much protesting will it take to get proper convictions?

Theres still a thousand miles to go with this incident.

[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.

Subdivision 1. Aiding, abetting; liability. A person is criminally liable for a crime committed by another if the person intentionally aids, advises, hires, counsels, or conspires with or otherwise procures the other to commit the crime.

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.

[The Yen Man]

Originally Posted by Snuffleupagus

Other 3 cops are now charged with aiding and abetting murder.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...yds-death.html

All 4 idiots could get 40 years...but we know they wont.

Normally, I'd agree. But, for some reason, I feel like this time around, they're going to throw the book at them to try to send a "see, we're tough on this stuff too" type message in order to subdue the protests.

But then again, Trump did pardon that one racist sheriff right, so who knows.

[Huntingwhale]

Originally Posted by Itse

The bolded part is to me kind of mind-boggling, because one common issue I see with basically all of these US police brutality videos, is just how [B]bad the average US cop seems to be at use of physical force. They are often clearly just pathetically unskilled considering use of force is their job.

Obviously the properly committed takedowns don't get shared in social media as police brutality, but it's still amazing to me. I would actually imagine that's one big reason why they're so prone to go for their guns or tasers. If you know you're about 50/50 to come out on top in a wrestling match, you really need to avoid them.

As I've sometimes mentioned, I drove in a cab in a nightshift in Helsinki for many years, and have seen more than my share of police taking down people for various reasons. Men, women, big guys, drunks, addicts. I've had to call the police to remove an aggressive client a few times. Seeing an experienced patrol officer wrap up a guy coming at them in a second never seizes to impress me.

But of course, every Finnish police officer has trained for years. As a result they're generally super good at what they do. They're also consistently the most trusted profession. (There's a national ranking every year.)

I remember being in Cochem, Germany with 3 extended family members a couple years ago, sitting on patio overlooking a parking lot drinking wine. A drunk goon comes barreling into the parking lot, stumbling into cars, yelling at tourists watching him, and generally being a disruptive arsehole. He was a large dude, very intimidating physically and looked like he was ready to rumble with whomever crossed his path.

We see 2 squad cars pull up and I start to think this is it, he's gonna get taken down hard given the damage and disturbance he was causing. Even as the cops cops got out and began to approach him, the man took an aggressive stance and tone towards them. Us being North Americans, we wouldn't have blinked an eye if the cops had taken him down hard, beat him around a bit, then dragged his ass to the car. That's what we are used to seeing this side of the pond. I was 100% expecting it.

Instead the officers mostly sat back and 2 of them came forward to talk to the guy. They de-escalated the situation and within minutes the guy sat down on the ground against a car and was talking back and forth with them. The officers weren't being aggressive. They weren't ordering him around. Not a single weapon was drawn. The other officers let the 2 'negotiators' do their job and stood back calmly and just observed.

Eventually the man got up and willingly walked with them to one of the cars. No handcuffs, no violence, no aggression. They sat there with the door open for a bit with him in the back, talking to him, then eventually they all drove away with him in the back.

It was one of the calmest and coolest things I've ever witnessed. My aunt and uncle are both German citizens and were translating to us what they were talking about. They were talking with the guy about his life, his job, his evening. No one was reading him his rights, saying what a loser he was, or any of the other jabber you would hear in NA. Just calm and collected. Eventually they asked (!) the man politely if he would come to the station so they could sort it all out.

My aunt and uncle said this was typical of the German police. Very rarely do they pull out a weapon, and it's even rarer they actually use it. They also do quite a bit of training and many positions are required to have a post-secondary degree and they have a diligent process of filtering out inadequate trainees.

New Era's description of US police are quite different. Seems quite a few literal psychopaths make it onto the force. People who enjoy asserting dominance over others and take delight in causing pain. People with ties to white supremacy groups who see it as their god-given duty to fight the ''colors and blacks'' who they think are overtaking their country. Combine that with a massive weapons industry that caters to these department to supply all the tough-guy weapons they desire, it's a recipe for a disaster.

Canada lies somewhere between the middle of the US and EU model. However IMO it's more leaned towards the US model with the militarization of the police force, even here in Calgary. I hope that changes. Things like changing all the squad cars to look like military vehicles to match their NA counterparts was a stupid move.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by The Yen Man

Normally, I'd agree. But, for some reason, I feel like this time around, they're going to throw the book at them to try to send a "see, we're tough on this stuff too" type message in order to subdue the protests.

But then again, Trump did pardon that one racist sheriff right, so who knows.

Still have to convince 12 jurors. Everyone's seen the video so you may have to go to Zimbabwe.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by Huntingwhale

I remember being in Cochem, Germany with 3 extended family members a couple years ago, sitting on patio overlooking a parking lot drinking wine. A drunk goon comes barreling into the parking lot, stumbling into cars, yelling at tourists watching him, and generally being a disruptive arsehole. He was a large dude, very intimidating physically and looked like he was ready to rumble with whomever crossed his path.

We see 2 squad cars pull up and I start to think this is it, he's gonna get taken down hard given the damage and disturbance he was causing. Even as the cops cops got out and began to approach him, the man took an aggressive stance and tone towards them. Us being North Americans, we wouldn't have blinked an eye if the cops had taken him down hard, beat him around a bit, then dragged his ass to the car. That's what we are used to seeing this side of the pond. I was 100% expecting it.

Instead the officers mostly sat back and 2 of them came forward to talk to the guy. They de-escalated the situation and within minutes the guy sat down on the ground against a car and was talking back and forth with them. The officers weren't being aggressive. They weren't ordering him around. Not a single weapon was drawn. The other officers let the 2 'negotiators' do their job and stood back calmly and just observed.

Eventually the man got up and willingly walked with them to one of the cars. No handcuffs, no violence, no aggression. They sat there with the door open for a bit with him in the back, talking to him, then eventually they all drove away with him in the back.

It was one of the calmest and coolest things I've ever witnessed. My aunt and uncle are both German citizens and were translating to us what they were talking about. They were talking with the guy about his life, his job, his evening. No one was reading him his rights, saying what a loser he was, or any of the other jabber you would hear in NA. Just calm and collected. Eventually they asked (!) the man politely if he would come to the station so they could sort it all out.

My aunt and uncle said this was typical of the German police. Very rarely do they pull out a weapon, and it's even rarer they actually use it. They also do quite a bit of training and many positions are required to have a post-secondary degree and they have a diligent process of filtering out inadequate trainees.

New Era's description of US police are quite different. Seems quite a few literal psychopaths make it onto the force. People who enjoy asserting dominance over others and take delight in causing pain. People with ties to white supremacy groups who see it as their god-given duty to fight the ''colors and blacks'' who they think are overtaking their country. Combine that with a massive weapons industry that caters to these department to supply all the tough-guy weapons they desire, it's a recipe for a disaster.

Canada lies somewhere between the middle of the US and EU model. However IMO it's more leaned towards the US model with the militarization of the police force, even here in Calgary. I hope that changes. Things like changing all the squad cars to look like military vehicles to match their NA counterparts was a stupid move.

What you described in Germany is my experience with Finnish police too. They're pretty good at handling situations through talking. That ALSO requires training, but I'm sure it makes the life of a patrolling office massively easier.

Just the tone of voice they use is different from how a US officer opens up dialogue, and they clearly know how to phrase things to de-escalate the situation instead of escalating it. When the police show up, they're a calming presence in a situation, and I can't imagine them losing their temper as easily as you tend to see in the US videos.

There's always people who can't be reasoned with, but even my own experience says that as long as you keep your cool and choose your words, the vast majority of difficult situations and budding conflicts can be resolved peacefully.

[Locke]

Well said HW.

[PepsiFree]

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.

[Bagor]

http://www.mncourts.gov/mncourtsgov/...nt06032020.pdf

State of Minnesota County of Hennepin State of Minnesota, Plaintiff vs. DEREK MICHAEL CHAUVIN

COMPLAINT
The Complainant submits this complaint to the Court and states that there is probable cause to believe Defendant committed the following offense(s):

COUNT I
Charge: Second Degree Murder - Unintentional - While Committing A Felony
Minnesota Statute: 609.19.2(1)
Maximum Sentence: Imprisonment of not more than 40 years. Offense Level: Felony
Offense Date (on or about): 05/25/2020
Control #(ICR#): 20200338
Charge Description: That on or about May 25, 2020, in Hennepin County, Minnesota, Derek Michael Chauvin, caused the death of a human being, George Floyd, without intent to effect the death of any person, while committing or attempting to commit a felony offense other than criminal sexual conduct in the first or second degree with force or violence or a drive-by shooting, namely assault in the third degree.

COUNT II
Charge: Third Degree Murder - Perpetrating Eminently Dangerous Act and Evincing Depraved Mind
Minnesota Statute: 609.195(a)
Maximum Sentence: Imprisonment of not more than 25 years.
Offense Level: Felony
Offense Date (on or about): 05/25/2020 Control #(ICR#): 20200338
Charge Description: That on or about May 25, 2020, in Hennepin County, Derek Michael Chauvin caused the death of another, George Floyd, by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life.

COUNT III
Charge: Second Degree Manslaughter - Culpable Negligence Creating Unreasonable Risk
Minnesota Statute: 609.205(1)
Maximum Sentence: Imprisonment of not more than 10 years, or payment of a fine of not more than $20,000, or both.
Offense Level: Felony
Offense Date (on or about): 05/25/2020
Control #(ICR#): 20200338
Charge Description: That on or about May 25, 2020, in Hennepin County, Minnesota, Derek Michael Chauvin caused the death of another, George Floyd, by his culpable negligence, creating an unreasonable risk and consciously took the chances of causing death or great bodily harm to another, George Floyd.


STATEMENT OF PROBABLE CAUSE

On May 25, 2020, someone called 911 and reported that a man bought merchandise from Cup Foods at 3759 Chicago Avenue in Minneapolis, Hennepin County, Minnesota with a counterfeit $20 bill. At 8:08 p.m.,Minneapolis Police Department (MPD) Officers Thomas Lane and J.A.Kueng arrived with their body worn cameras (BWCs) activated and running. The officers learned from store personnel that the man who passed the counterfeit $20 was parked in a car around the corner from the store on 38th Street.

BWC video obtained by the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension shows that the officers approached the car,Lane on the driver's side and Kueng on the passenger side. Three people were in the car; George Floyd was in the driver's seat, a known adult male was in the passenger seat and a known adult female was sitting in the backseat. As Officer Lane began speaking with Mr. Floyd, he pulled his gun out and pointed it at Mr. Floyd's open window and directed Mr. Floyd to show his hands. When Mr. Floyd put his hands on the steering wheel,Lane put his gun back in its holster.

While Officer Kueng was speaking with the front seat passenger, Officer Lane ordered Mr. Floyd out of the car, put his hands on Mr. Floyd, and pulled him out of the car. Officer Lane handcuffed Mr. Floyd.

Once handcuffed ,Mr. Floyd walked with Officer Lane to the sidewalk and sat on the ground at Officer Lane's direction. When Mr. Floyd sat down he said “thank you man” and was calm. In a conversation that lasted just under two minutes,Officer Lang asked Mr. Floyd for his name and identification. Officer Lane asked Mr. Floyd if he was "on anything" and noted there was foam at the edges of his mouth. Officer Lane explained that he was arresting Mr. Lloyd for passing counterfeit currency.

At 8:14 p.m., Officers Kueng and Lanestood Mr. Floyd up and attempted to walk Mr. Floyd to their squad car. As the officers tried to put Mr. Floyd in their squad car, Mr. Floyd stiffened up and fell to the ground. Mr. Floyd told the officers that he was not resisting but he did not want to get in the back seat and was claustrophobic.

MPD Officers Derek Chauvin (the defendant) and Tou Thao then arrived in a separate squad car.

The officers made several attempts to get Mr. Floyd in the backseat of their squad car by pushing him from the driver's side. As the officers were trying to force Mr. Floyd in the backseat, Mr. Floyd repeatedly said that he could not breathe. Mr. Floyd did not voluntarily sit in the backseat and the officers physically struggled to try to get him in the backseat.

The defendant went to the passenger side and tried to get Mr. Floyd into the car from that side and Lane and Kueng assisted.

The defendant pulled Mr. Floyd out of the passenger side of the squad car at 8:19:38 p.m. and Mr. Floyd went to the ground face down and still handcuffed.Kueng held Mr. Floyd's back and Lane held his legs.The defendant placed his left knee in the area of Mr. Floyd's head and neck. Mr. Floyd said, "I can't breathe" multiple times and repeatedly said,"Mama" and "please," as well. At one point, Mr. Floyd said “I’m about to die.” The defendant and the other two officers stayed in their positions.

One of the officers said,"You are talking fine" to Mr.Floyd as he continued to move back and forth. Lane asked, "should we roll him on his side?" and the defendant said,"No, staying put where we got him." Officer Lane said," I am worried about excited delirium or whatever." The defendant said,"That's why we have him on his stomach." The defendant and Kueng held Mr. Floyd’s right hand up. None of the three officers moved from their positions.

While Mr. Floyd showed slight movements, his movements and sounds decreased until at 8:24:24, Mr. Floyd stopped moving. At 8:25:31 the video appears to show Mr. Floyd ceasing to breathe or speak. Lane said, "want to roll him on his side." Kueng checked Mr. Floyd's right wrist for a pulse and said, "I couldn't find one." None of the officers moved from their positions.

At 8:27:24, the defendant removed his knee from Mr. Floyd's neck. An ambulance and emergency medical personnel arrived, the officers placed Mr. Floyd on a gurney, and the ambulance left the scene. Mr. Floyd was pronounced dead at Hennepin County Medical Center.

The Hennepin County Medical Examiner(ME) conducted Mr.Floyd's autopsy on May26,2020. While the ME did not observe physical findings supportive of mechanical asphyxia, the ME opines that Mr. Floyd died from cardiopulmonary arrest while being restrained by law enforcement officers. The autopsy revealed that Mr. Floyd had arteriosclerotic and hypertensive heart disease, and toxicology testing revealed the presence of fentanyl and evidence of recent methamphetamine use. The ME opined that the effects of the officers’ restraint of Mr. Floyd, his underlying health conditions, and the presence of the drugs contributed to his death. The ME listed the cause of death as “[c]ardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression,” and concluded the manner of death was homicide.

The defendant and Officers Lange and Kueng subdued Mr. Floyd prone to the ground in this manner for nearly 9 minutes. During this time, Mr. Floyd repeatedly stated he could not breathe and his physical condition continued to deteriorate such that force was no longer necessary to control him. 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. Officer Chauvin’s restraint of Mr. Floyd in this manner for a prolonged period was a substantial causal factor in Mr. Floyd losing consciousness, constituting substantial bodily harm, and Mr. Floyd’s death as well.

Defendant is in custody.

[nik-]

Interesting that they're considering it assault (from a legal standpoint) in order to elevate it to a 2nd degree charge.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Just thinking it might be tough to prove. The squad is on duty, professionally trained officers. This isnt 3 civilians not stopping 1 civilian beating on another.

I, as a trained officer, would never think my senior would be that stupid and kill the guy. He's just scaring him. Any moment now, he's going to let go. Right?

That would be my defense. The police culture of not speaking up.

Do we know Chauvin was the senior here? Or are we just assuming?