‘He’s not getting out’: Calls for Trump to pardon Derek Chauvin slammed by state AG who says former cop ‘still owes Minnesota 22 1/2 years’

[Nickyjo]

Hmm, all those defending Chauvin should have been on his defense team, or at least around for his appeals, which were denied by state courts and the Supreme Court. He apparently is currently arguing that his representation was inadequate, so stand by.

 

[SNOWFLAKE]

Hmm, all those defending Chauvin should have been on his defense team, or at least around for his appeals, which were denied by state courts and the Supreme Court. He apparently is currently arguing that his representation was inadequate, so stand by.

Righties who weren't in the court room to hear the actual evidence including the coroner's report love to act like they "know it all" when most of the time they are just blindly regurgitating what rightwing media has urged them to regurgitate.

And when challenged, you get this kind of childish rebuttal:

Irrelevant injected TDS rant ignored.

 

[eohrnberger]

Corrected your statement.

I’m sorry that you think kneeling on a handcuffed and subdued suspects neck

This was an accepted restraining.

for 7 minutes

This was clearly not.

is part of a single police manual in the country, because it isn’t.

This is where you are wrong.

The Minneapolis Police Department banned all forms of neck restraints and chokeholds weeks after Floyd’s death, but at the time of his May 25 arrest by Derek Chauvin and other officers, certain neck restraints were permitted — provided certain guidelines and conditions were followed.​

EXPLAINER: Was officer's knee on Floyd's neck authorized?

CHICAGO (AP) — A critical factor for jurors to consider at a former Minneapolis police officer's trial in George Floyd's death is whether he violated the department's policy on neck restraints when he knelt on Floyd's neck.

apnews.com

Note
'at the time of his May 25 arrest by Derek Chauvin and other officers, certain neck restraints were permitted at the time of his May 25 arrest by Derek Chauvin and other officers, certain neck restraints were permitted'

And as I pointed out, even if it was, police manuals don’t override murder statutes lol.

 

[eohrnberger]

That is false. Chauvin did not perform a department approved MRT.

See citation in post #153.

Chauvin's own training manual showed the knee goes on the shoulder. Chauvin had his knee on Floyd's neck. The office is supposed to kneel & lean back. Chauvin stood upright on his knee, his foot sometimes lifting off the ground, applying most of his body weight on Floyd's neck. The officer is supposed to regularly check the suspects pulse. Chauvin didn't do that. If the suspect appears in distress, the officer is supposed to move the suspect out of the prone position and onto their side. Chauvin didn't do that either. In court, a superior officer testified under oath that Chauvin did not properly follow his training.

 

[rahl]

This was an accepted restraining.

No it wasn’t.

This was clearly not.

Right.

This is where you are wrong.

The Minneapolis Police Department banned all forms of neck restraints and chokeholds weeks after Floyd’s death, but at the time of his May 25 arrest by Derek Chauvin and other officers, certain neck restraints were permitted — provided certain guidelines and conditions were followed.​

EXPLAINER: Was officer's knee on Floyd's neck authorized?

CHICAGO (AP) — A critical factor for jurors to consider at a former Minneapolis police officer's trial in George Floyd's death is whether he violated the department's policy on neck restraints when he knelt on Floyd's neck.

apnews.com

Note
'at the time of his May 25 arrest by Derek Chauvin and other officers, certain neck restraints were permitted at the time of his May 25 arrest by Derek Chauvin and other officers, certain neck restraints were permitted'

Minneapolis police manual, nor any department in the country, says you can apply any form of chokehold or neck restriction on a handcuffed suspect and subdued by 5 officers, for 7 minutes. Even if it did state they could, police manuals do not override murder statutes.

 

[rahl]

See citation in post #153.

Refuted already.

 

[Jagged]

See citation in post #153.

Post #153 is s fail. It says some neck restraints are permissible, but Chauvin attempted to execute the Maximal Restraint Technique, which is NOT a neck restraint, which is why law enforcement trainers testified he improperly administered MRT.

The picture I showed you, is an illustration of how to administer MRT and that image came from Chauvin's own training manual.

As did this text:

Chauvin DIDN'T follow police protocol, instituted his own bastardized version of MRT, and murdered Floyd. That's why he was convicted.

 

[notquiteright]

Righties who weren't in the court room to hear the actual evidence including the coroner's report love to act like they "know it all" when most of the time they are just blindly regurgitating what rightwing media has urged them to regurgitate.

It reminds me of all the MAGAnut wailing about 2020... they just 'knew' Biden stole the election, why ol' so n so on MAGAnuts R US podcast has 'undisputable' evidence....
But for so reason that 'evidence' vanishes like The Convict's scruples when in a court of law.
When a MAGAnut says, 'I believe', or 'from what I heard' the grain of salt required is massive....

 

[eohrnberger]

No it wasn’t.

Contrary to the previous citation provided.

Right.

Minneapolis police manual, nor any department in the country, says you can apply any form of chokehold or neck restriction on a handcuffed suspect and subdued by 5 officers, for 7 minutes. Even if it did state they could, police manuals do not override murder statutes.

Again, contrary to the previous citation provided.

 

[eohrnberger]

Post #153 is s fail. It says some neck restraints are permissible, but Chauvin attempted to execute the Maximal Restraint Technique, which is NOT a neck restraint, which is why law enforcement trainers testified he improperly administered MRT.

The picture I showed you, is an illustration of how to administer MRT and that image came from Chauvin's own training manual.

As did this text:

Chauvin DIDN'T follow police protocol, instituted his own bastardized version of MRT, and murdered Floyd. That's why he was convicted.

Again, the common conflation of a legal restraint applied for longer than the manual, not following that part of the training and policy isn't banning the restraint.

 

[SavannahMann]

Again, the common conflation of a legal restraint applied for longer than the manual, not following that part of the training and policy isn't banning the restraint.

Actions have consequences. The more serious the action the greater the consequences. If I pull my gun I am now at risk of several charges. Aggravated Assault. Assault with a Deadly Weapon. Attempted Murder. And I haven’t pulled the trigger yet.

The actions need to be justified. I pulled my gun because I saw a guy trying to pull a kid into a van. I had a reason for doing what I did.

The kneeling hold was authorized. But only until the suspect was restrained. The guy was in cuffs before Chauvin showed up. I’m not sure how much more restrained he was supposed to be.

Before I started carrying a gun, I took classes on Concealed Carry. These classes explained the laws to me. How my actions could result in legal jeopardy. Things to avoid doing if I wished to avoid that fate. I was informed of the risks involved with the choices.

Chauvin was informed that the hold could restrict the airway. Chauvin was informed that if the suspect had trouble breathing then roll him on his side to open the airway. Chauvin was told what to do and continued the risky choice.

Chauvin didn’t do a damned thing he was taught to do. He didn’t follow the procedures or his training. Chauvin had a history of doing that. So partly the blame is on leadership who did not get rid of Chauvin when he continued doing things wrong for years. But mostly the blame falls on Chauvin. For a decade a warning was out there from the DOJ sent to the police departments explaining Positional Asphyxiation. Chauvin figured he knew better. He was a tough street cop and knew what he was doing. He had done it before.

Chauvin was playing Russian Roulette. Every time he broke the rules and got away with it he did not really understand the risk. Chauvin thought he was good. Too good to do it wrong. Eventually those risks caught up with him. Now he will likely die in Prison. It was his choice. It was an informed choice. He was informed that he wasn’t supposed to.

I don’t feel bad for Chauvin. I don’t feel bad for his family. If you do something that you have been told is wrong and then cry because you have to face consequences then that’s on you. Chauvin didn’t care enough about his family to do his job right why should I give a flying f?

The charges were fair. The conviction was earned. The sentence is appropriate.

 

[eohrnberger]

Actions have consequences.

Undisputed.

The more serious the action the greater the consequences. If I pull my gun I am now at risk of several charges. Aggravated Assault. Assault with a Deadly Weapon. Attempted Murder. And I haven’t pulled the trigger yet.

The actions need to be justified. I pulled my gun because I saw a guy trying to pull a kid into a van. I had a reason for doing what I did.

The kneeling hold was authorized. But only until the suspect was restrained. The guy was in cuffs before Chauvin showed up. I’m not sure how much more restrained he was supposed to be.

Before I started carrying a gun, I took classes on Concealed Carry. These classes explained the laws to me. How my actions could result in legal jeopardy. Things to avoid doing if I wished to avoid that fate. I was informed of the risks involved with the choices.

Chauvin was informed that the hold could restrict the airway. Chauvin was informed that if the suspect had trouble breathing then roll him on his side to open the airway. Chauvin was told what to do and continued the risky choice.

Again, undisputed. I'm not trying to justify what Chauvin, nor the consequences of the action which he took.

Chauvin didn’t do a damned thing he was taught to do. He didn’t follow the procedures or his training. Chauvin had a history of doing that.

Agreed specific to how long he held Floyd in that restraint.

So partly the blame is on leadership who did not get rid of Chauvin when he continued doing things wrong for years. But mostly the blame falls on Chauvin. For a decade a warning was out there from the DOJ sent to the police departments explaining Positional Asphyxiation. Chauvin figured he knew better. He was a tough street cop and knew what he was doing. He had done it before.

I have already stipulated in previous post that there are some people who shouldn't be on the police force. Chauvin, through his actions, specific to applying the restraint for as long as he did, is one of those people.

Chauvin was playing Russian Roulette. Every time he broke the rules and got away with it he did not really understand the risk. Chauvin thought he was good. Too good to do it wrong. Eventually those risks caught up with him. Now he will likely die in Prison. It was his choice. It was an informed choice. He was informed that he wasn’t supposed to.

I don’t feel bad for Chauvin.

I don't feel bad for Chauvin either.

I don’t feel bad for his family. If you do something that you have been told is wrong and then cry because you have to face consequences then that’s on you. Chauvin didn’t care enough about his family to do his job right why should I give a flying f?

The charges were fair. The conviction was earned. The sentence is appropriate.

The canonization and glorification of Floyd by the left, cited in previous posts, for political purposes isn't fair, isn't earned, and isn't appropriate, but none the less, the left did.

 

[SavannahMann]

Undisputed.




Again, undisputed. I'm not trying to justify what Chauvin, nor the consequences of the action which he took.


Agreed specific to how long he held Floyd in that restraint.


I have already stipulated in previous post that there are some people who shouldn't be on the police force. Chauvin, through his actions, specific to applying the restraint for as long as he did, is one of those people.


I don't feel bad for Chauvin either.


The canonization and glorification of Floyd by the left, cited in previous posts, for political purposes isn't fair, isn't earned, and isn't appropriate, but none the less, the left did.

Floyd was a victim of police brutality and misconduct. Demonizing the victim is exactly what the RW does every single time. An innocent man is shot by police. Well he didn’t follow instructions. He should have done what he was told.

Victim blaming is the first thing the Conservatives do in every case. A woman is assaulted. Well she shouldn’t dress like that. She’s asking for trouble.

It wasn’t the responsibility of Floyd not to die. It was the responsibility of the police not to kill him.

 

[Jagged]

Again, the common conflation of a legal restraint applied for longer than the manual, not following that part of the training and policy isn't banning the restraint.

Killing someone by using a dangerous restraint that is not part of their training is absolutely a banned policy. And it wasn't just because he maintained that ad hoc restraint for 9 minutes. It was also because he failed to monitor Floyd's condition, in accordance with his training. And he failed to place Floyd in a recovery position, in accordance with his training. He did everything wrong, resulting in Floyd's death. He is where he belongs.

 

[eohrnberger]

Floyd was a victim of police brutality and misconduct. Demonizing the victim is exactly what the RW does every single time.

It isn't 'Demonizing the victim' raising the facts about the man's criminal history.

An innocent man is shot by police. Well he didn’t follow instructions. He should have done what he was told.

Victim blaming is the first thing the Conservatives do in every case. A woman is assaulted. Well she shouldn’t dress like that. She’s asking for trouble.

It wasn’t the responsibility of Floyd not to die.

I concede there is police culpability, but you have to concede that raising the facts about the man's criminal history isn't demonizing him.

It was the responsibility of the police not to kill him.

This from the 'police are always wrong' point of view?

 

[eohrnberger]

Killing someone by using a dangerous restraint that is not part of their training is absolutely a banned policy.

Previous citation shows that it was a legal restraint hold, one which was applied far too long, so the assertion 'absolutely a banned policy' is not it he least accurate.

And it wasn't just because he maintained that ad hoc restraint for 9 minutes. It was also because he failed to monitor Floyd's condition, in accordance with his training. And he failed to place Floyd in a recovery position, in accordance with his training. He did everything wrong, resulting in Floyd's death. He is where he belongs.

Given that the police manual specifies monitoring Floyd's condition, a recovery position, strengthens that the hold was legal and in the manual and not an 'absolutely a banned policy', so thank you for supporting my point.

 

[Jagged]

Previous citation shows that it was a legal restraint hold, one which was applied far too long, so the assertion 'absolutely a banned policy' is not it he least accurate.


Given that the police manual specifies monitoring Floyd's condition, a recovery position, strengthens that the hold was legal and in the manual and not an 'absolutely a banned policy', so thank you for supporting my point.

He was not trained to restrain someone with the maneuver he applied. Him improperly administering MRT led to someone's death. The trainer from his department testified Chauvin was not trained to do what he did.

 

[eohrnberger]

He was not trained to restrain someone with the maneuver he applied. Him improperly administering MRT led to someone's death. The trainer from his department testified Chauvin was not trained to do what he did.

This does not change that the restraint was legal and in the training manual, it in fact reinforces that it was legal and was in the training manual.

 

[rahl]

Contrary to the previous citation provided.

No. In accordance with the previous citation. Nowhere in there, nor any other police manual in the country is choking someone handcuffed, face down on the ground with 5 other officers controlling him an approved technique.

Again, contrary to the previous citation provided.

Refuted above.

 

[rahl]

This does not change that the restraint was legal and in the training manual, it in fact reinforces that it was legal and was in the training manual.

Proven false.

 

[Jagged]

This does not change that the restraint was legal and in the training manual, it in fact reinforces that it was legal and was in the training manual.

Now you're flat out lying. A clear indication even you know you've lost this argument. The restraint that he applied is NOT in his training manual. I showed you an image from his own training manual of how to administer MRT, and it was not what he did. That's why a trainer from his department testified Chauvin was NOT trained to restrain anyone in the fashion he restrained Floyd.

 

[SavannahMann]

It isn't 'Demonizing the victim' raising the facts about the man's criminal history.




I concede there is police culpability, but you have to concede that raising the facts about the man's criminal history isn't demonizing him.


This from the 'police are always wrong' point of view?

Why aren’t you raising the facts of Chauvin’s history of abuses and misconduct? After all he killed someone. Floyd never did.

 

[eohrnberger]

Proven false.

No, it hasn't proven false.
Per Jagged Post:

Post #153 is s fail. It says some neck restraints are permissible, but Chauvin attempted to execute the Maximal Restraint Technique, which is NOT a neck restraint, which is why law enforcement trainers testified he improperly administered MRT.

The picture I showed you, is an illustration of how to administer MRT and that image came from Chauvin's own training manual.

As did this text:

Chauvin DIDN'T follow police protocol, instituted his own bastardized version of MRT, and murdered Floyd. That's why he was convicted.

Specifically "an illustration of how to administer MRT and that image came from Chauvin's own training manual."

Now you're flat out lying.

No, I'm not.

This is from the court documents.

Doctor who performed George Floyd autopsy stands by homicide conclusion

The medical examiner who performed the autopsy on George Floyd after last May's deadly arrest explained how he concluded the death was a homicide at the hands of police in testimony on Friday at former Minneapolis policeman Derek Chauvin's murder trial.

www.reuters.com

Hard to tell from the training manual image as it doesn't clearly show where the person's neck is, but appears to be right by the knee, and I'm sure opinions will differ whether they are the same or not.

A clear indication even you know you've lost this argument.

<blah><blah><blah>, sorry, but no.

The restraint that he applied is NOT in his training manual. I showed you an image from his own training manual of how to administer MRT, and it was not what he did. That's why a trainer from his department testified Chauvin was NOT trained to restrain anyone in the fashion he restrained Floyd.

 

[rahl]

No, it hasn't proven false.

objectively proven false. It’s why chauvin is in prison.

 

[Nickyjo]

Undisputed.




Again, undisputed. I'm not trying to justify what Chauvin, nor the consequences of the action which he took.


Agreed specific to how long he held Floyd in that restraint.


I have already stipulated in previous post that there are some people who shouldn't be on the police force. Chauvin, through his actions, specific to applying the restraint for as long as he did, is one of those people.


I don't feel bad for Chauvin either.


The canonization and glorification of Floyd by the left, cited in previous posts, for political purposes isn't fair, isn't earned, and isn't appropriate, but none the less, the left did.

Floyd is a legitimate symbol, much as Rodney King was. Neither was a saint. But I repeat a friends saying, “Human rights are not rewards for good behavior. They are inalienable.” Most Americans should know this.

But can we face facts about this thread?Chauvin could have killed Floyd and his family in cold blood and might still have defenders here.