Race in America - Riots Explode in Chicago

[MDlaxfan76]

Did Chauvin decide to arrest Floyd or was he called in to assist in an arrest that was already underway ?

In light of you just read, that is inconsequential.

Chauvin was the 3rd officer to arrive. The first 2 had been trying (unsuccessfully) to take Floyd into custody.
The arresting officer told Chauvin that he was arresting Floyd for forgery.

And we thought you weren't paying attention...

actually, not forgery, for paying for a pack of cigarettes with a counterfeit bill. The clerk testified that while he knew from its color that it was counterfeit, Floyd did not seem to know.

I (reluctantly) researched it before I replied. When Chauvin arrived, an officer already on scene told Chauvin he was arresting Floyd for forgery. Chauvin did not make the decision to arrest Floyd. The arrest was already underway when Chauvin arrived. I believe the initial dispatch call also included "forgery" but I can't find a transcript of that call, & it's irrelevant since Chauvin did not initiate the arrest.

I haven't found any testimony as to "forgery"..."counterfeit bill" yes. And that's not necessarily a crime at all, if not knowingly. No arrest should have happened.

Not that I see much relevance beyond whether there should have been an arrest in the first place, thus Floyd's protestations that he hadn't done anything wrong...the real question is why the restraint on the ground, hands handcuffed behind his back, knee on neck and back...even after no pulse much less no breathing...much less no movement at all...for 3+ minutes. That's when and where this becomes a no question conviction on the charges presented.

[cradleandshoot]

Did Chauvin decide to arrest Floyd or was he called in to assist in an arrest that was already underway ?

In light of you just read, that is inconsequential.

Chauvin was the 3rd officer to arrive. The first 2 had been trying (unsuccessfully) to take Floyd into custody.
The arresting officer told Chauvin that he was arresting Floyd for forgery.

And we thought you weren't paying attention...

actually, not forgery, for paying for a pack of cigarettes with a counterfeit bill. The clerk testified that while he knew from its color that it was counterfeit, Floyd did not seem to know.

Wasn't Mr Floyd too effed up to even know his own name? Refresh my memory here MD, is ignorance of the law an excuse to break the law?

[admin]

Are you planning on moving to East Baltimore any time soon? How about the WB? You know, so you can be amongst the people that you care about so much. Nah, I am sure that you will stay in Roland Park so that you can virtue signal and judge from afar. Roland Park, a great place to practice arm chair liberalism.

You went to Florida, how unbelievably selfish of you. You could have killed someone's grandmother. How can you live with yourself?

jhu, no personal attacks and... Take it down a notch.

[Peter Brown]

jhu93 may have been rough with the phrasing, but everyone understands what he was saying (and agrees).

Reading last nights posts in this thread is a great window in how liberals have no ability to create independent thought. It’s sad really. Lemming personalities.

The pedantic tone of one poster is remarkable given how little he knows about pretty much anything.

Old Salt continues to impress with his nuance and patience with the muttonheads he deals with.

I badly want to read the hysterical faux outrage posts by Fanlax libs if Chauvin isn’t convicted. It would be the height of unintended humor.

[Brooklyn]

Nah, the Judge is PO'd at Waters, rightfully so, and he did say that the defense might well file an appeal on that basis, but it was also quite clear, more than clear, that he thought it would fail on appeal.

Some right wingers have said she called for riots. They have re-played the comments in the local news and there was no such talk. The delusionals of the far right claim she was being inflammatory but the truth is that those loonies are the ones being that way.

[MDlaxfan76]

Did Chauvin decide to arrest Floyd or was he called in to assist in an arrest that was already underway ?

In light of you just read, that is inconsequential.

Chauvin was the 3rd officer to arrive. The first 2 had been trying (unsuccessfully) to take Floyd into custody.
The arresting officer told Chauvin that he was arresting Floyd for forgery.

And we thought you weren't paying attention...

actually, not forgery, for paying for a pack of cigarettes with a counterfeit bill. The clerk testified that while he knew from its color that it was counterfeit, Floyd did not seem to know.

Wasn't Mr Floyd too effed up to even know his own name? Refresh my memory here MD, is ignorance of the law an excuse to break the law?

No one claimed ignorance of the law, but you need to know the bill is counterfeit to be breaking the law. If you don't know, no law is broken. According to the clerk, Floyd did not seem to know.

It would have been appropriate for the police to investigate the possibility of a crime having been committed, by inquiring of Floyd as to his awareness, where he got the bill, etc. Floyd may well been the victim of someone else's attempt to pass bad bills. But it was not appropriate to arrest first, investigate later.

[cradleandshoot]

Did Chauvin decide to arrest Floyd or was he called in to assist in an arrest that was already underway ?

In light of you just read, that is inconsequential.

Chauvin was the 3rd officer to arrive. The first 2 had been trying (unsuccessfully) to take Floyd into custody.
The arresting officer told Chauvin that he was arresting Floyd for forgery.

And we thought you weren't paying attention...

actually, not forgery, for paying for a pack of cigarettes with a counterfeit bill. The clerk testified that while he knew from its color that it was counterfeit, Floyd did not seem to know.

Wasn't Mr Floyd too effed up to even know his own name? Refresh my memory here MD, is ignorance of the law an excuse to break the law?

No one claimed ignorance of the law, but you need to know the bill is counterfeit to be breaking the law. If you don't know, no law is broken. According to the clerk, Floyd did not seem to know.

It would have been appropriate for the police to investigate the possibility of a crime having been committed, by inquiring of Floyd as to his awareness, where he got the bill, etc. Floyd may well been the victim of someone else's attempt to pass bad bills. But it was not appropriate to arrest first, investigate later.

On this point, i agree with you. The cops should have confiscated the fake bill and let the detectives handle it from there. This is a point that is related, but a tangent here. Everytime I shop at Wal Mart i see the same thing. The local police are dragging someone from the store arrested for shop lifting. Wal Mart policy has been to prosecute shop lifters to the fullest extent of the law. Where should the new line be drawn MD? Should Wal Mart just hand the issue off to local authorities with a ticket and hope the shoplifter shows up to court. It becomes complicated when it is time to take petty theft seriously. It costs small business a ton of money every year.

[MDlaxfan76]

Did Chauvin decide to arrest Floyd or was he called in to assist in an arrest that was already underway ?

In light of you just read, that is inconsequential.

Chauvin was the 3rd officer to arrive. The first 2 had been trying (unsuccessfully) to take Floyd into custody.
The arresting officer told Chauvin that he was arresting Floyd for forgery.

And we thought you weren't paying attention...

actually, not forgery, for paying for a pack of cigarettes with a counterfeit bill. The clerk testified that while he knew from its color that it was counterfeit, Floyd did not seem to know.

Wasn't Mr Floyd too effed up to even know his own name? Refresh my memory here MD, is ignorance of the law an excuse to break the law?

No one claimed ignorance of the law, but you need to know the bill is counterfeit to be breaking the law. If you don't know, no law is broken. According to the clerk, Floyd did not seem to know.

It would have been appropriate for the police to investigate the possibility of a crime having been committed, by inquiring of Floyd as to his awareness, where he got the bill, etc. Floyd may well been the victim of someone else's attempt to pass bad bills. But it was not appropriate to arrest first, investigate later.

On this point, i agree with you. The cops should have confiscated the fake bill and let the detectives handle it from there. This is a point that is related, but a tangent here. Everytime I shop at Wal Mart i see the same thing. The local police are dragging someone from the store arrested for shop lifting. Wal Mart policy has been to prosecute shop lifters to the fullest extent of the law. Where should the new line be drawn MD? Should Wal Mart just hand the issue off to local authorities with a ticket and hope the shoplifter shows up to court. It becomes complicated when it is time to take petty theft seriously. It costs small business a ton of money every year.

Shoplifting is actually a crime, it is observable, and can be documented as such.

Now, Walmart certainly should be careful that it is not targeting surveillance or intervention based on any biases, but if they believe they have observed a crime they should indeed confirm that crime with camera surveillance and report it to authorities for arrest. Walmart is big and technically savvy enough to have immediately accessible surveillance tape to store managers and staff on the floor reviewable before intervention or at least before asking the police to arrest the shoplifter.

Small businesses have a tougher time with this than the big box chains, but the tech is available and is becoming more and more affordable.

Also note that shoplifting is a non violent crime and no aspect of it would justify racial profiling, much less abusive force by the police.

Of course, if we were super serious about such crimes we'd embrace facial recognition tech...I'm not a proponent of such, but it really does effectively eliminate such crimes in places where the technology is universally deployed...eg China. Too much government control for my taste, but it does work.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Walmart

[cradleandshoot]

Did Chauvin decide to arrest Floyd or was he called in to assist in an arrest that was already underway ?

In light of you just read, that is inconsequential.

Chauvin was the 3rd officer to arrive. The first 2 had been trying (unsuccessfully) to take Floyd into custody.
The arresting officer told Chauvin that he was arresting Floyd for forgery.

And we thought you weren't paying attention...

actually, not forgery, for paying for a pack of cigarettes with a counterfeit bill. The clerk testified that while he knew from its color that it was counterfeit, Floyd did not seem to know.

Wasn't Mr Floyd too effed up to even know his own name? Refresh my memory here MD, is ignorance of the law an excuse to break the law?

No one claimed ignorance of the law, but you need to know the bill is counterfeit to be breaking the law. If you don't know, no law is broken. According to the clerk, Floyd did not seem to know.

It would have been appropriate for the police to investigate the possibility of a crime having been committed, by inquiring of Floyd as to his awareness, where he got the bill, etc. Floyd may well been the victim of someone else's attempt to pass bad bills. But it was not appropriate to arrest first, investigate later.

On this point, i agree with you. The cops should have confiscated the fake bill and let the detectives handle it from there. This is a point that is related, but a tangent here. Everytime I shop at Wal Mart i see the same thing. The local police are dragging someone from the store arrested for shop lifting. Wal Mart policy has been to prosecute shop lifters to the fullest extent of the law. Where should the new line be drawn MD? Should Wal Mart just hand the issue off to local authorities with a ticket and hope the shoplifter shows up to court. It becomes complicated when it is time to take petty theft seriously. It costs small business a ton of money every year.

Shoplifting is actually a crime, it is observable, and can be documented as such.

Now, Walmart certainly should be careful that it is not targeting surveillance or intervention based on any biases, but if they believe they have observed a crime they should indeed confirm that crime with camera surveillance and report it to authorities for arrest. Walmart is big and technically savvy enough to have immediately accessible surveillance tape to store managers and staff on the floor reviewable before intervention or at least before asking the police to arrest the shoplifter.

Small businesses have a tougher time with this than the big box chains, but the tech is available and is becoming more and more affordable.

Also note that shoplifting is a non violent crime and no aspect of it would justify racial profiling, much less abusive force by the police.

Of course, if we were super serious about such crimes we'd embrace facial recognition tech...I'm not a proponent of such, but it really does effectively eliminate such crimes in places where the technology is universally deployed...eg China. Too much government control for my taste, but it does work.

If you own the store that just got hustled for a fake twenty that is no different than someone walking out of Wal mart with a 20 dollar pair of jeans. In both cases the store owner is out 20 bucks. The point of view being discussed here is if Mr Floyd knew the bill was fake. I'm guessing he probably did. The 64 thousand dollar question here is it a serious enough crime to arrest Mr Floyd? That is an interesting question. If I own a small store, i guess i should no longer expect people stealing from me to be charged with a crime other than a ticket to appear in court.

[cradleandshoot]

Walmart

There is a deterrent for you...

[MDlaxfan76]

Did Chauvin decide to arrest Floyd or was he called in to assist in an arrest that was already underway ?

In light of you just read, that is inconsequential.

Chauvin was the 3rd officer to arrive. The first 2 had been trying (unsuccessfully) to take Floyd into custody.
The arresting officer told Chauvin that he was arresting Floyd for forgery.

And we thought you weren't paying attention...

actually, not forgery, for paying for a pack of cigarettes with a counterfeit bill. The clerk testified that while he knew from its color that it was counterfeit, Floyd did not seem to know.

Wasn't Mr Floyd too effed up to even know his own name? Refresh my memory here MD, is ignorance of the law an excuse to break the law?

No one claimed ignorance of the law, but you need to know the bill is counterfeit to be breaking the law. If you don't know, no law is broken. According to the clerk, Floyd did not seem to know.

It would have been appropriate for the police to investigate the possibility of a crime having been committed, by inquiring of Floyd as to his awareness, where he got the bill, etc. Floyd may well been the victim of someone else's attempt to pass bad bills. But it was not appropriate to arrest first, investigate later.

On this point, i agree with you. The cops should have confiscated the fake bill and let the detectives handle it from there. This is a point that is related, but a tangent here. Everytime I shop at Wal Mart i see the same thing. The local police are dragging someone from the store arrested for shop lifting. Wal Mart policy has been to prosecute shop lifters to the fullest extent of the law. Where should the new line be drawn MD? Should Wal Mart just hand the issue off to local authorities with a ticket and hope the shoplifter shows up to court. It becomes complicated when it is time to take petty theft seriously. It costs small business a ton of money every year.

Shoplifting is actually a crime, it is observable, and can be documented as such.

Now, Walmart certainly should be careful that it is not targeting surveillance or intervention based on any biases, but if they believe they have observed a crime they should indeed confirm that crime with camera surveillance and report it to authorities for arrest. Walmart is big and technically savvy enough to have immediately accessible surveillance tape to store managers and staff on the floor reviewable before intervention or at least before asking the police to arrest the shoplifter.

Small businesses have a tougher time with this than the big box chains, but the tech is available and is becoming more and more affordable.

Also note that shoplifting is a non violent crime and no aspect of it would justify racial profiling, much less abusive force by the police.

Of course, if we were super serious about such crimes we'd embrace facial recognition tech...I'm not a proponent of such, but it really does effectively eliminate such crimes in places where the technology is universally deployed...eg China. Too much government control for my taste, but it does work.

If you own the store that just got hustled for a fake twenty that is no different than someone walking out of Wal mart with a 20 dollar pair of jeans. In both cases the store owner is out 20 bucks. The point of view being discussed here is if Mr Floyd knew the bill was fake. I'm guessing he probably did. The 64 thousand dollar question here is it a serious enough crime to arrest Mr Floyd? That is an interesting question. If I own a small store, i guess i should no longer expect people stealing from me to be charged with a crime other than a ticket to appear in court.

Well, you made the point. At best you'd be guessing. It's appropriate to investigate. But the clerk himself didn't think Floyd knew and he was in the closest position to observe. The police didn't investigate, they arrested.

The clerk is horrified that his reporting the problem led to Floyd's death, but he did the right thing in telling his manager, who called the police. The manager did the right thing as well, assuming he didn't think he could handle the situation with police help...the police did not do the right thing.

And most importantly, Chauvin did not.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Walmart

There is a deterrent for you...

Yep. Maybe Walmart shouldn’t sell those or keep them behind a locked case. Maybe if he were a dog, you would feel differently. I am sure I can find a video.

[DMac]

So how long before we get a verdict and what are the chances of a hung jury?
Stand by for nuclear like explosion if there is.

[jhu72]

So how long before we get a verdict and what are the chances of a hung jury?
Stand by for nuclear like explosion if there is.

No idea on when the verdict comes in. The longer it takes the more likely a hung jury.
It won't be a single explosion if there is a hung jury.

[Peter Brown]

So how long before we get a verdict and what are the chances of a hung jury?
Stand by for nuclear like explosion if there is.

No idea on when the verdict comes in. The longer it takes the more likely a hung jury.
It won't be a single explosion if there is a hung jury.

College Student Aces Final By Just Answering 'Racism!' To Every Question

Lol. The above headline, Babylon Bee satirical, reminds me so much of some woke white FLP Fanlaxers.

[MDlaxfan76]

So how long before we get a verdict and what are the chances of a hung jury?
Stand by for nuclear like explosion if there is.

No idea on when the verdict comes in. The longer it takes the more likely a hung jury.
It won't be a single explosion if there is a hung jury.

Yup, expect it in every major city. Small ones too, likely.
The pent up anger will indeed explode, despite the Floyd's family calling for 'peace and tranquility'.
Cities are preparing for the worst, hoping for the best.

a-holes are hoping for the worst.

EDIT: Racist a-holes.

[Peter Brown]

So how long before we get a verdict and what are the chances of a hung jury?
Stand by for nuclear like explosion if there is.

No idea on when the verdict comes in. The longer it takes the more likely a hung jury.
It won't be a single explosion if there is a hung jury.

Yup, expect it in every major city. Small ones too, likely.
The pent up anger will indeed explode, despite the Floyd's family calling for 'peace and tranquility'.
Cities are preparing for the worst, hoping for the best.

a-holes are hoping for the worst.

Some folks could help dampen said ‘pent up anger’ by refusing to parrot/promote/echo bs woke talking points and fake narratives. And crying racist and racism with every story.

But I doubt they will.

[cradleandshoot]

Walmart

There is a deterrent for you...

Yep. Maybe Walmart shouldn’t sell those or keep them behind a locked case. Maybe if he were a dog, you would feel differently. I am sure I can find a video.

My nephew the former RPD cop talked about one murder he responded to. One 16 year old shot another 16 year old friend in the head because he disrespected him. In the big scheme of things human life means diddly squat to people in every town, city and state in this country. Unless of course a cop does the shooting. Some Black Lives Matter... other black lives don't mean chit even in their own communities... NO SNITCH... NO SNITCH... NO SNITCH. After Latasha Shaw was f***ing beaten to death in the middle of the street 2 blocks from here I lived my whole life. Don't f***ing tell me that black lives matter. Her life didn't mean chit to the approximately 50 black folks that witnessed her murder and never said chit about it to the police. What mattered was... NO SNITCH... NO SNITCH... NO SNITCH. If Black Lives Mattered 50 f****ing people should have told the police who killed this woman. No SNITCH...NO SNITCH... NO SNITCH. I understand some of the FLP white guys here have told me not to worry about this. That will be addressed somewhere down the road... yeah, sure it f***ing will. Sure it will. I stood at that corner where Latasha Shaw was murdered trying to save her own daughters life and cried like a baby it hurt me so much. Nobody f***ing cared about her where she lived. She died like a dog beaten and stabbed and left in the middle of the road. She was trying to protect her daughter from getting beaten up... NO SNITCH... NO SNITCH... NO SNITCH... NO SNITCH... Some Black Lives Matter, but not if your name is Latasha Shaw, then nobody f****ing cares about YOUR LIFE.

https://www.democratandchronicle.com/st ... 470404002/

[ggait]

Acquittals are generally the quickest decisions juries make. Not happening here.

Guilty verdicts actually take much longer. Especially when you have (as here) multiple charges that have to be sifted through.

A hung jury only comes after the (almost) guilty verdict would have been reached.

So there's not probably not going to be any tea leaves for reading for many more days of deliberations.