I’m No Lawyer…

…and I’ll leave plenty of room for those of you who are.

But as re Keith Ellison taking over the prosecution of the officers involved in the George Floyd case, I can’t help but think the following:

Hot Potato: Mike Freeman just got the most controversial case in his misbegotten career off his plate. He can’t help but be relieved to get this “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” monstrosity off his docket.

Priorities For starters, Ellison’s not trying the case personally – the head of his trials division is.

On the other hand, the MN Attorney General’s office, under a fifty-year-long series of DFL occupants (Ellison, Lori Swanson, Mike Hatch, Skip Humphrey and Warren Spannaus), has basically turned into a Better Business Bureau with guns, and a 1-800-ASK-GARY for political non-profits looking to harass businesses into compliance with their pet policies. I’m not gonna say the MNAGO doesnt have the expertise to prosecute a shoplifter caught on camera – but it’s not exactly been their front foot for the last, oh, couple generations or so.

I’m gonna guess the state’ll be paying a lot for “consultants” on this case.

A Charge Or Two Too Far: So let’s take a look – via my admittedly non-lawyer perspective – at the three charges. I’ll add emphasis to what I – again, a non-lawyer – think the “beef” is.

Murder in the Second Degree:

Whoever does either of the following is guilty of murder in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 40 years:

(1) causes the death of a human being with intent to effect the death of that person or another, but without premeditation

[(2) relates to drive-by shootings – clearly not applicable]

Subd. 2. Unintentional Murders. Whoever does either of the following is guilty of unintentional murder in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 40 years:

(1) causes the death of a human being, 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; or
[(2) relates to killing people who’ve taken out restraining orders]

Now, let’s look at Murder in the Third Degree

(a) Whoever, without intent to effect the death of any person, causes the death of another by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life, is guilty of murder in the third degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 25 years.

[(b) relates to selling drugs to someone who dies of an overdose – not applicable here – Ed]

Here’s Manslaughter in the Second Degree.

 A person who causes the death of another by any of the following means is guilty of manslaughter in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than ten years or to payment of a fine of not more than $20,000, or both:

(1) by the person’s culpable negligence whereby the person creates an unreasonable risk, and consciously takes chances of causing death or great bodily harm to another; or [several sections related to actions that don’t apply – the statute is linked, holler if you disagree – Ed]

So – knowing what we know now, what do you think is going to fly beyond a reasonable doubt?

That:

  1. The officers intended to kill Floyd while committing a felony offense – which would involve proving that “doing their jobs” was a felony? Or
  2. Unintentionally killed Floyd while committing an eminently dangerous act? You could say kneeling on someone’s neck might be eminently dangerous, and I might agree 100%, but qualified immunity – the doctrine that if one government employee gets away with something, they all get away with it – and the tactic is not completely outlandish, if discouraged, in police circles, might be a problem, here.
  3. The officers were culpably negligent and created an unreasonable (i.e., would fail to convince a jiury) risk.

The usual caveats apply: case law colors how statues are applied, and I’m not a lawyer.

But given that it appears to this non-lawyer that charging Chauvin with Second Degree murder was a) done to placate the crowd and b) find charges for the other three officers and c) looks like a very long shot, I have to wonder if they aren’t banking on, in effect, making a political statement and not bothering with justice.

Politics First: Being entirely a puppet of “progressives” with deep pockets, you knew Ellison was going to have to bump up the charges to…well, whatever he could get away with. The party he answers to needs to have a ritual stoning, or some other red meat to throw its constituents and, ideally, beat Republicans over the head with in the fall…

…without actually having negative consequences for the November elections.

Ellison, himself as graceful and fluid in his deflections as a German jazz band, telegraphed this during his initial presser, saying a trial would take “months”. Meaning – it’ll stay in the realm of political mud-throwing until after November, giving the DFL PR machine plenty of time to repair damage from the inevitable disturbances that erupt after Chauvin is acquitted for Second Degree murder (and, I can’t help but think, delaying that verdict until the depth of a Minnesota winter, deterring a lot of rioting).

87 thoughts on “I’m No Lawyer…

  1. Hmmm, did the word “Constitution” get me into the moderation black hole?

  2. That 72.4% can expect a knock on the door in three… two… one…

  3. This is why we don’t try cases on comments sections. Legally, one cannot “easily conclude” anything. Politically, you can conclude anything you want.

  4. NRO just came out with an article on this, “New Floyd charges will be hard to prove…..”

  5. These are just the assaults, abuses, and violations of rights that cops are willing to do on camera. Imagine what they do when the camera is off.

    Imagine what it takes to be one of the people who can see this and say that it doesn’t happen.

    What they mean is “they deserved it”

  6. Emery I;
    That’s an interesting point. Officer Chauvin had to know that he was being filmed. Why didn’t he let Floyd up after he realized it? Of course, there are a lot of conspiracy theories out there that this whole thing is suspicious, from the suggestion that Chauvin has been spotted in videos of police brutality in other cities to Chauvin was instructed to do this to get the riots going and will never serve a day in prison. Related stuff like his neighbors never knew he was a cop to his wife filed for divorce, she’ll sell the house and move out of state, where her and Chauvin’s IDs will be changed. Maybe there is more to this whole story than we realize.

  7. If all the circumstances of Floyd’s arrest and death were the same, but he was a white guy, what would have happened to the cops involved?
    We all know, nothing would have happened to them.

  8. Tehre you go with facts, logic and rational thought, Mamm. Will you ever learn the world had moved on? Or do you intend on hiding out in Galt’s Gulch? When you find it, let us know, will you.

  9. “Imagine what it takes to be one of the persons that can see this and say that it doesn’t happen”

    In the meantime in Minneapolis, two separate homicides are under investigation.

  10. In case John Kraephammer comes back . . .

    John, you said the Minneapolis Police Use of Force policy only allows neck kneeling in extreme situations. I think the word you used was “hairy,” which I doubt is in the manual, I suspect that’s your characterization of the restrictions in the manual.

    I’d like to read the precise wording of the manual to see what, specifically, it required. Can you post a link? Much appreciated.

  11. Never mind, John. Found it:

    http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/police/policy/mpdpolicy_5-300_5-300

    Scroll down to 5-311, Use of Neck Restraints and Choke Holds. The Conscious Neck Restraint is allowed any time the suspect is Actively Resisting, which is defined in 5-302 as: “A subject engages in active resistance when engaging in physical actions (or verbal behavior reflecting an intention) to make it more difficult for officers to achieve actual physical control.”

    Hairiness is not a factor.

    If Floyd was Actively Resisting, then the Conscious Neck Restraint was an approved use of non-lethal force to effect a lawful arrest, viewed from the perspective of the officer on the scene and not 20-20 hindsight (Graham v. Connor).

    The fact that Floyd had hidden underlying an medical condition that caused respiratory distress, and was taking opiates which exacerbated his difficulty breathing, do not affect the reasonableness of the use of approved force, at least not under the policy and the case-law.

    I know you feel confident the jury will convict for Second Decree Murder. I don’t share your confidence.

  12. If all the circumstances of Floyd’s arrest and death were the same, but he was a white guy, what would have happened to the cops involved?
    We all know, nothing would have happened to them.,/i>

    Unless Floyd was a white woman, shot by a black cop, and then only after 8 months of judicious deliberation on whether or not to charge the cop.

    Not trying to be tu quoque about this. Neither Noor or Chauvin should have been on the police force. Who is in control of that?

  13. As early as I can tell, Ellison hasn’t ever prosecuted a case. The AG’s office doesn’t prosecute any murder cases. This will be a $hit show. Their only actual hope is for Freeman’s office to do all the real work.

    Having Ellison take over this case is the best news Chauvin and the other officers could have received!

  14. Doakes, 

    My generalized answer there was not accurate enough, and it’s worthwhile that you corrected me.

    Neck restraint may be allowed, and even with some latitude for its application, but there remains an observation to argue that this knee to the neck was out of compliance as a matter of technique, lengthiness, and application at all on Floyd.  And they are going to argue it.  And they aren’t going to have great difficulty arguing it, because the guy died and they’ve got the video and because every police chief in the country has had to go on record saying that’s not a compliant use of force.

    Have any of you watched ALL the video?  And seen the lady EMT bystander who argues with these jokers about taking a pulse?  The video is damning.  There isn’t any getting around the video.

    The defense can go ahead and hire whoever among the few national use of force trial consultant whores that are willing to testify this neck kneel was kosher… maybe they can get the guy from the Damond trial…. and its going to come off, ya know, whore-y and stupid, cuz of the videotape.  And the prosecution will respond with dozens of authority figures, like Arradondo, who are going to be obliged to call it a murder.

    Really, I would not be surprised if Chauvin and his attorney end up taking a plea and the certainty of say 15 years so that he can have a life after prison.  Ellison being AG as a credible figure to ‘the mob’ allows for the possibility of a plea.

    Most of you here make the mistake of analyzing the potential results of the case based on what you think of Ellison as a [lefty] politician.  He isn’t trying the case personally, he’s the office executive, and he’s going to steer for the most sensible effective strategy as outlined by his staff of professional attorneys, and they are reasonably formidable.  And he can get any public prosecuting attorney he wants to put on staff for this.  If he wants the Noor prosecutors, he can go get them.
    Chauvin is getting convicted. step up to bet otherwise.

  15. Have any of you watched ALL the video?

    No Kraphammer, and neither have you. In fact, No one but the cops, the Governor, the Antifa General and his terrified underlings have seen the coos body cam recordings.

    So you think, for a minute, that if those videos showed a meekly complying suspect being slammed to the pavement for no reason, it wouldn’t be running on a non-stop loop on MSNBC?

    Are you that dim?

  16. The defense can go ahead and hire whoever among the few national use of force trial consultant whores that are willing to read the MPD’s policy on neck restraints, verbatim

    FTFY

    Oh, they will, Dimwit. They will.

    Hey, I know. How about they call the Chief up to read it?

    Lol. You poor thing.

  17. (or verbal behavior reflecting an intention)

    Wow! Just wow! Don’t want to hear anyone talk about “justification” anymore. And unless I am reading it incorrectly, this applies to black, white, yellow, brown, green and polka dot and stripes people.

  18. Thanks NW. Miss me? I see nothing much had changed. I’m gonna take a different approach to participation this time around. We’ll see how long it will last.

  19. Floyd passed out at 8:30, was taken by ambulance to the hospital, and died in the hospital at 9:25.

    How did the kneeling cause his death?

    I read Golfdoc’s analysis earlier in the thread. I understand that saying “I can’t breathe” isn’t as obviously self-refuting as it appears. But the medical mechanism by which the patient died an hour later is unclear to me. Can anyone give me more explanation? Because I’m not seeing the nexus between kneeling at 8:25 and dying at 9:25. Thanks.

  20. C’mon JD, this is just more proof that Hellison was right about murder 2. Heck, he should have gone for murder 1! Can’t wait to see the missing video how St. Floyd ended up on the ground in the first place. I venture a guess it will be after the 10th after St. Floyd’s martyrdom will no longer be useful to the puppeteers.

  21. Doakes, there is no nexus that way.  The attending physician in the hospital he was taken to called the time of death at 9:25.  This is a matter of process that they need a physician to call time of death, and not medicine / science.  He calls the time as that of when life saving efforts stop.  There is obviously no way to read the timestamp of Floyd’s last heartbeat. The county ME report repeats that time of death.

    There is no one in the world who misunderstands that the actual moment Floyd died was 9:25.  There is fairly great consensus that Floyd’s literal moment of death was at say the 4-6 minute mark of Chauvin kneeling on him (its on the bystander video that none of you have watched completely) or in the moments immediately after.  From there on he never had a pulse or heartbeat that any of the other cops or EMT could find.

    The kneeling caused his death because it induced a cardiac arrest.  Both autopsies are in harmony on this.  Either with or without asphyxiation, depending on which autopsy you think is better.

  22. Crap, first, were you present at the scene? You seem to be so sure of what went on. Care to enlighten us how St. Floyd ended up on the pavement? Second, there was only one autopsy done. When you get your facts straight, come back to the sandbox. But since it looks like you don’t care for facts much, I guess we will not be seeing you much. Oh, whom am I kidding – insufferable trolls gonna troll…

  23. JPA, you’re a moron.  A stupid man with no place in a conversation like this in general, but perfectly in harmony with the other stupid morons in this comment thread.

    The family had an autopsy done, and the county had an autopsy done.  Use your fingers, that equals 2.  These are facts in the public domain that are not in dispute.
    When I want to argue about how he ended up on the pavement, I’ll argue it.

  24. How many times was the body cut? Once or twice? Can you count, cupcake? Like I said, the libturd contingent here only got dumber. Oh the good ‘ol days of +/-RinkyDinkDFL.

  25. You corrected me, and claimed he was autopsied once. Was he autopsied twice retard? Can you read, chimp?

  26. Thanks for the clarification, John.

    I take it you convinced the officer will be convicted of Second Degree Murder. Your analysis seems to depend on the jury seeing the video. You assume the entire video will be admitted into evidence.

    Should it be? Rule 403 Minnesota Rules of Evidence: Exclusion of Relevant Evidence on Grounds of Prejudice, Confusion, or Waste of Time.

    “Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence.”

    If you were the prosecution, what argument would you make to overcome the Defense assertion that the probative value of the video is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice?

    If the video gets tossed out, do you remain confident in your prediction of conviction?
    .

  27. I do assume the entire facebook video from the civilian and all the bodycam video and any security cam video will be admitted.

    I am sure you are correct to note the defense will try to suppress these, but they will lose these motions, and I’ll bet on that as well.  All the video is directly related to the charge, it’s got intrinsic probative value that can never be diminished by however prejudicial it might be cuz… it’s the evidence, it speaks for itself.

    You’re a lawyer right?  I cant believe that this is a possibility that you could take seriously, that the videos such that they constitute a recording of what is the alleged criminal act, would be suppressed.

  28. Crap, first, the link you posted is crap, but what would anyone expect from a libturd with a crap handle. Second you are denser than +/-RinkyDinkDFL after all. Autopsy, the cutting, is done once. Semanitcs, but you are too blind and incapable of cogent and independent thought to see through the bullcrap. Maybe you will learn something here but I am not holding my breath, judging by your brethren. Your comment on the arrest video is very informative on how dense you are – nobody had seen the part how St. Floyd ended up on the pavement (at least I have not as of the moment I am writing this), yet you breathlessly continue to claim all video of the incident is damning and only helpful for the prosecution. Denser than a bag of rocks you are. Carry on, cupcake.

  29. Well JPA, I do congratulate you on being able to read, somewhat.  And you even used carriage returns in your last post.

    No one should buy the akshully analysis of this righty cop sucker webzine, that Baden’s autopsy isn’t an autopsy.  He got paid to issue an autopsy report, and he issued one.  It’s an autopsy.

  30. John, continuing our discussion of your certainty that the cops will be convicted of Second Degree Murder (as principals or accessories):

    Suppose the defense convinces the Court that the extensive pre-trial publicity, the pronouncements of various government officials, the involvement of noted race hustlers Keith Ellison and Al Sharpton, the past riots and threats of more if a guilty verdict not returned, all combine to make it impossible for the defendant to obtain a fair trial in Hennepin County and a change of venue is required.

    If the trial got moved outstate, say Lac Qui Parle County, where the proportion of Black jurors is much smaller and folks tend to be less obsessed with Twin Cities themes like systemic White racism, do you still feel certain of conviction? Or does your certainty depend on having a Hennepin County jury?

  31. Crsap, you must be so used to crap sandwiches you can no longer tell they taste like shit. But that’s ok, what can you expect from someone who subscribes to the “But I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express” mentality. Carry on cupcake.

  32. Joe – I would agree the potential for venue change is high-ish.  Forced to guess, I lean that a venue change does not happen.

    It is a better jury pool for Chauvin if there is a venue change to outstate.

    I do not think the other guys, Lane, Keung, and Thou, will necessarily get convicted of murder 2.  I commit to a prediction Chauvin gets convicted or pleas, and minimally does 15 years in prison.

  33. The venue for trial will be moved surely. I wonder if they can get this trial even going this year?

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.