George Floyd's murder and racism

[RabbiKnife]

Having a little bit of experience in the field, I was very surprised that the murder charge stuck.

In order for it to have been murder, one of two things were required to be proved:

Either

1) There was intent to kill Floyd

or

2) Chauvin acted with "depraved indifference". That he knew his actions had a very good chance of causing Floyd's death.

And I don't see that either was met.

Agreed

You are not responsible for the drugs in a perps system.

[IMINXTC]

Having a little bit of experience in the field, I was very surprised that the murder charge stuck.

In order for it to have been murder, one of two things were required to be proved:

Either

1) There was intent to kill Floyd

or

2) Chauvin acted with "depraved indifference". That he knew his actions had a very good chance of causing Floyd's death.

And I don't see that either was met.

Agreed

You are not responsible for the drugs in a perps system.

Yes, there is that. Very troubling.

[Fenris]

Chauvin needed to be held accountable for causing Floyd's death, but I agree the charges and sentencing were over the top.

If the jury had returned a verdict of manslaughter, i.e. Chauvin should have realized that his actions could cause death, I would be more onboard. Although honestly, subduing a large man who doesn't want to be held down is very difficult.

At the end of the day, the LA riots following the Rodney King verdict remain a lesson learned.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. The court's job is to dispense justice, not prevent riots.

[Sojourner]

At the end of the day, the LA riots following the Rodney King verdict remain a lesson learned.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. The court's job is to dispense justice, not prevent riots.

The LA riots were a result of outrage in the black community over the leniency shown to the cops that beat Rodney King. I'm just saying that by charging Chauvin with second-and third-degree murder as well as second-degree manslaughter, and seeking a 30-year sentence, the prosecution ensured there was no perception of leniency.

[Fenris]

The LA riots were a result of outrage in the black community over the leniency shown to the cops that beat Rodney King.

Again, I am not understanding you. A court is not supposed to be "lenient" or "harsh", a court is supposed to dispense justice.

I'm just saying that by charging Chauvin with second-and third-degree murder as well as second-degree manslaughter, and seeking a 30-year sentence, the prosecution ensured there was no perception of leniency.

An acquaintance (not in law enforcement) said to me that Chauvin had to be some sort of sacrificial lamb to prevent riots. You seem to be suggesting a similar idea. But a court's job is not to prevent riots. It's to dispense justice. Finding someone guilty of a crime they did not commit in order to prevent a riot is not justice.

[Oscar_Kipling]

The LA riots were a result of outrage in the black community over the leniency shown to the cops that beat Rodney King.

Again, I am not understanding you. A court is not supposed to be "lenient" or "harsh", a court is supposed to dispense justice.

I'm just saying that by charging Chauvin with second-and third-degree murder as well as second-degree manslaughter, and seeking a 30-year sentence, the prosecution ensured there was no perception of leniency.

An acquaintance (not in law enforcement) said to me that Chauvin had to be some sort of sacrificial lamb to prevent riots. You seem to be suggesting a similar idea. But a court's job is not to prevent riots. It's to dispense justice. Finding someone guilty of a crime they did not commit in order to prevent a riot is not justice.

hm, again not having followed the trial, did Chauvin not have a trial by jury?

[Sojourner]

An acquaintance (not in law enforcement) said to me that Chauvin had to be some sort of sacrificial lamb to prevent riots. You seem to be suggesting a similar idea.

I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility.

But a court's job is not to prevent riots. It's to dispense justice.
 Finding someone guilty of a crime they did not commit in order to prevent a riot is not justice.

History attests that man's judicial system is flawed and the courts don't always do a stellar job of dispensing justice. At times the innocent have been convicted and the guilty exonerated. Circumstances can influence the outcome of a trial--be it shenanigans on the part of the prosecution or defense, or impartial jurors. I don't believe justice was served in the O.J. Simpson trial. Following that trial, one of the black jurors responded to a reporter's question about the verdict by saying, "We gotta look out for our own." Look, I could be wrong, and it was not my intent to belabor the point. I simply expressed an unsubstantiated comment in passing. Suffice it to say, I'm not convinced that the possibility of civil unrest factored in when assessing the charges against Chauvin--especially given the BLM atmosphere and George Floyd being so central to it. (You yourself questioned whether the evidence was commensurate with the charges against him).

[RabbiKnife]

The LA riots were a result of outrage in the black community over the leniency shown to the cops that beat Rodney King.

Again, I am not understanding you. A court is not supposed to be "lenient" or "harsh", a court is supposed to dispense justice.

I'm just saying that by charging Chauvin with second-and third-degree murder as well as second-degree manslaughter, and seeking a 30-year sentence, the prosecution ensured there was no perception of leniency.

An acquaintance (not in law enforcement) said to me that Chauvin had to be some sort of sacrificial lamb to prevent riots. You seem to be suggesting a similar idea. But a court's job is not to prevent riots. It's to dispense justice. Finding someone guilty of a crime they did not commit in order to prevent a riot is not justice.

hm, again not having followed the trial, did Chauvin not have a trial by jury?

Juries can be extraordinarily unreliable.

[Oscar_Kipling]

The LA riots were a result of outrage in the black community over the leniency shown to the cops that beat Rodney King.

Again, I am not understanding you. A court is not supposed to be "lenient" or "harsh", a court is supposed to dispense justice.

I'm just saying that by charging Chauvin with second-and third-degree murder as well as second-degree manslaughter, and seeking a 30-year sentence, the prosecution ensured there was no perception of leniency.

An acquaintance (not in law enforcement) said to me that Chauvin had to be some sort of sacrificial lamb to prevent riots. You seem to be suggesting a similar idea. But a court's job is not to prevent riots. It's to dispense justice. Finding someone guilty of a crime they did not commit in order to prevent a riot is not justice.

hm, again not having followed the trial, did Chauvin not have a trial by jury?

Juries can be extraordinarily unreliable.

I really would be interested in your answers to my questions in my response to you. I'm fascinated by your stance so far as I can suss it out and I'd really like to put together a fuller picture of your views.

[RabbiKnife]

This response is likely as useless as horns on a brass billy goat.

I don't think my previous response was ambiguous.  I said what I said, and I meant what I said.  It doesn't need explanation or expansion. I refuse to play the Humpty Dumpty post-modern deconstructionist or Hegelian games of word play.

But because I'm in a good mood, I will dare a short response.

What is "white privilege?"  A  nonsensical, leftist word game to create a straw man against which to pillory every condition known to man.  Foolishness.  "White privilege" has the same force of language as the phrases "military intelligence" or "school cafeteria food" or "Christian nationalism."

Absolutely.  Every race, creed, culture, tribe, and language group has its own set of preferences, prejudices, biases, and affinities.   What is race?  Mein Gott in Himmel, what a navel gazing question.  Race is genetics.  DNA.  Nothing more, nothing, less.  We all come from either Ham, Shem, or Japheth.  Pick your family tree.

Opinions are like rectums.  Everyone has one, all serve essentially the same function, and many are ill maintained and should not be revealed. 

I pay little attention to fools, and fools certainly do not sway my opinions, so I really have little concern for the navel gazers, the narcissists, the social justice warriors, the self-identifiers, the whiners, the parasites, the perpetual complaining, the chest thumpers, the accusers, or the self-righteous, whether left or right, marxist or conservative.

The Word of God is true.  Jesus is true.  Everything else is measured by that standard.

[Oscar_Kipling]

This response is likely as useless as horns on a brass billy goat.

I don't think my previous response was ambiguous.  I said what I said, and I meant what I said.  It doesn't need explanation or expansion. I refuse to play the Humpty Dumpty post-modern deconstructionist or Hegelian games of word play.

But because I'm in a good mood, I will dare a short response.

What is "white privilege?"  A  nonsensical, leftist word game to create a straw man against which to pillory every condition known to man.  Foolishness.  "White privilege" has the same force of language as the phrases "military intelligence" or "school cafeteria food" or "Christian nationalism."

Absolutely.  Every race, creed, culture, tribe, and language group has its own set of preferences, prejudices, biases, and affinities.   What is race?  Mein Gott in Himmel, what a navel gazing question.  Race is genetics.  DNA.  Nothing more, nothing, less.  We all come from either Ham, Shem, or Japheth.  Pick your family tree.

Opinions are like rectums.  Everyone has one, all serve essentially the same function, and many are ill maintained and should not be revealed. 

I pay little attention to fools, and fools certainly do not sway my opinions, so I really have little concern for the navel gazers, the narcissists, the social justice warriors, the self-identifiers, the whiners, the parasites, the perpetual complaining, the chest thumpers, the accusers, or the self-righteous, whether left or right, marxist or conservative.

The Word of God is true.  Jesus is true.  Everything else is measured by that standard.

oh, I didn't mean to imply that your previous post was ambiguous or that you lacked conviction, its just that terms like "white privilege" and "race" are in my expirience defined very differently by different folks. I think this is very clearly exemplified by your response as I wouldnt define either word in the way that you did and I suspect that i'm not alone even in this thread. I hope it helps that I actually am truly surprised by your definition of race, or specifically that you believe that all "racial" lineages can be traced back to either Ham, Shem, or Japheth, that in itself feels like it was worth the push for elaboration. Anyway I appreciate you embellishing this brass billy goat, and I for one look forward to your future good moods when you might similarly elaborate on other beliefs and stances you hold because I could hardly be more pleased with what you've written here.

[Fenris]

hm, again not having followed the trial, did Chauvin not have a trial by jury?

Yes, and the jury's decision remains inexplicable to me. But other posters here are implying that it was necessary to prevent riots, which is not the purpose of a trial.

[Fenris]

Suffice it to say, I'm not convinced that the possibility of civil unrest factored in when assessing the charges against Chauvin--especially given the BLM atmosphere and George Floyd being so central to it. (You yourself questioned whether the evidence was commensurate with the charges against him).

And this should worry us. Again, a trial is supposed to determine guilt by the weight of the evidence, not come to a politically expedient decision.

[Fenris]

We all come from either Ham, Shem, or Japheth.  Pick your family tree.

Shem here.

[Rebecca]

O.J. would disagree