Police Body Camera Footage Proves George Floyd Was Not "Murdered"

[jc456]

ny force to esophagus or carotid is lethal force according to police training manuals.
Taser is also considered lethal force.
Lethal force does not have to ensure death, but just have that possibility.
Police can not use pressure on the neck unless they are allowed to run the risk of death, out of defense from a deadly threat.

Did the police need to restrain Floyd?
NO!
Absolutely not.
He was not being accused of a real crime, but just a suspect in a misdemeanor.
He never resisted.
There was never any excuse to use any force, much less lethal force like neck pressure.
They deliberately decided to use lethal force when was not at all warranted

Where’s the evidence of esophagus damage or obstruction?

 

[Rigby5]

The autopsy didn't find damaged tissues. How is that possible?

Here you go, buddy, the autopsy report.

https://www.hennepin.us/-/media/hennepinus/residents/public-safety/documents/floyd-autopsy-6-3-20.pdf

I. Blunt force injuries A. Cutaneous blunt force injuries of the forehead, face, and upper lip B. Mucosal injuries of the lips C. Cutaneous blunt force injuries of the shoulders, hands, elbows, and legs D. Patterned contusions (in some areas abraded) of the wrists, consistent with restraints (handcuffs)

As I have OFTEN posted!!!

"III. No life-threatening injuries identified A. No facial, oral mucosal, or conjunctival petechiae B. No injuries of anterior muscles of neck or laryngeal structures C. No scalp soft tissue, skull, or brain injuries D. No chest wall soft tissue injuries, rib fractures (other than a single rib fracture from CPR), vertebral column injuries, or visceral injuries E. Incision and subcutaneous dissection of posterior and lateral neck, shoulders, back, flanks, and buttocks negative for occult trauma.................

A. Blood drug and novel psychoactive substances screens: 1. Fentanyl 11 ng/mL 2. Norfentanyl 5.6 ng/mL 3. 4-ANPP 0.65 ng/mL 4. Methamphetamine 19 ng/mL 5. 11-Hydroxy Delta-9 THC 1.2 ng/mL; Delta-9 Carboxy THC 42 ng/mL; Delta-9 THC 2.9 ng/mL 6. Cotinine positive 7. Caffeine positive"

So NO LIFE THREATENING INJURIES but a shitload of drugs.................................and you want him CONVICTED???? Of what; handcuffing him???

Greg

I really think that's what the demofks think. I know in this thread they've stated several times they didn't understand the confrontation because Floyd didn't do anything. So basically they are saying fk the store owner who does he think he is.

You don't arrest someone over a questionable $20 bill.
You just give them a ticket.
The store clerk is a civil suit action, like you would do for fraud.
There is nothing to indicate Floyd was intentionally passing bad bills.

Post the link that says that. Also, a person impaired behind the wheel is an arrest offense

It is clear that even if one knowingly passes bad currency, it is a misdemeanor and not something you need to arrest a person over.
But since Floyd likely did not know if the bills were bad or not, it likely should not have been a crime at all.

{...
n Minnesota, penalties for knowingly passing or offering fake currency depend on the face value of the currency or the amount of property or services the person attempted to obtain. If the face value or property or services sought are less than $1,000, the crime is a misdemeanor with a maximum penalty of one year's jail time.
...}

Passing bad currency that someone passed to you and you were not aware, is not a crime.
Sitting behind the wheel while impaired, is not and CAN not be a crime.
They should not have arrested Floyd at all, and they likely would not have if he was white.

 

[jc456]

The autopsy didn't find damaged tissues. How is that possible?

Here you go, buddy, the autopsy report.

https://www.hennepin.us/-/media/hennepinus/residents/public-safety/documents/floyd-autopsy-6-3-20.pdf

I. Blunt force injuries A. Cutaneous blunt force injuries of the forehead, face, and upper lip B. Mucosal injuries of the lips C. Cutaneous blunt force injuries of the shoulders, hands, elbows, and legs D. Patterned contusions (in some areas abraded) of the wrists, consistent with restraints (handcuffs)

As I have OFTEN posted!!!

"III. No life-threatening injuries identified A. No facial, oral mucosal, or conjunctival petechiae B. No injuries of anterior muscles of neck or laryngeal structures C. No scalp soft tissue, skull, or brain injuries D. No chest wall soft tissue injuries, rib fractures (other than a single rib fracture from CPR), vertebral column injuries, or visceral injuries E. Incision and subcutaneous dissection of posterior and lateral neck, shoulders, back, flanks, and buttocks negative for occult trauma.................

A. Blood drug and novel psychoactive substances screens: 1. Fentanyl 11 ng/mL 2. Norfentanyl 5.6 ng/mL 3. 4-ANPP 0.65 ng/mL 4. Methamphetamine 19 ng/mL 5. 11-Hydroxy Delta-9 THC 1.2 ng/mL; Delta-9 Carboxy THC 42 ng/mL; Delta-9 THC 2.9 ng/mL 6. Cotinine positive 7. Caffeine positive"

So NO LIFE THREATENING INJURIES but a shitload of drugs.................................and you want him CONVICTED???? Of what; handcuffing him???

Greg

I really think that's what the demofks think. I know in this thread they've stated several times they didn't understand the confrontation because Floyd didn't do anything. So basically they are saying fk the store owner who does he think he is.

You don't arrest someone over a questionable $20 bill.
You just give them a ticket.
The store clerk is a civil suit action, like you would do for fraud.
There is nothing to indicate Floyd was intentionally passing bad bills.

Post the link that says that. Also, a person impaired behind the wheel is an arrest offense

It is clear that even if one knowingly passes bad currency, it is a misdemeanor and not something you need to arrest a person over.
But since Floyd likely did not know if the bills were bad or not, it likely should not have been a crime at all.

{...
n Minnesota, penalties for knowingly passing or offering fake currency depend on the face value of the currency or the amount of property or services the person attempted to obtain. If the face value or property or services sought are less than $1,000, the crime is a misdemeanor with a maximum penalty of one year's jail time.
...}

Passing bad currency that someone passed to you and you were not aware, is not a crime.
Sitting behind the wheel while impaired, is not and CAN not be a crime.
They should not have arrested Floyd at all, and they likely would not have if he was white.

Post the statute

 

[Devils_Advocate]

I disagree, I think it was either :
second degree unintentional felony murder, third degree “depraved mind” murder,
------------------------------------------
Why: I read when the Chauvins that Chauvin continue pressure on the neck:


Our video investigation shows that Mr. Chauvin did not remove his knee even after Mr. Floyd lost consciousness and for a full minute and 20 seconds after paramedics arrived at the scene.

On June 3, Hennepin County prosecutors added a more serious second-degree murder charge against Mr. Chauvin and also charged each of the three other former officers — Thomas Lane, J. Alexander Kueng and Tou Thao — with aiding and abetting second-degree murder.
How George Floyd Was Killed in Police Custody - The New York Times (nytimes.com)

---------------------------------------
and now we heard his knee was on his neck for 9:29.

The paramedics found him dead at the scene.

View attachment 474968

He kept his knee on his neck when he became unconscious , 9 mins and 29 seconds, he is guilty as shit.

Is he?

Or is the system?

He is guilty of Manslaughter in my personal opinion.

 

[Rigby5]

ny force to esophagus or carotid is lethal force according to police training manuals.
Taser is also considered lethal force.
Lethal force does not have to ensure death, but just have that possibility.
Police can not use pressure on the neck unless they are allowed to run the risk of death, out of defense from a deadly threat.

Did the police need to restrain Floyd?
NO!
Absolutely not.
He was not being accused of a real crime, but just a suspect in a misdemeanor.
He never resisted.
There was never any excuse to use any force, much less lethal force like neck pressure.
They deliberately decided to use lethal force when was not at all warranted

Where’s the evidence of esophagus damage or obstruction?

Obstruction of the esophagus leaves no local marks, but it does kill brain cells, and that is what the coroner found.
He found that death was likely caused by obstructed blood flow to the brain, from pressure on the carotid artery.
{...
died of "cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression."
...

an independent autopsy carried out by experts hired by Floyd's family concluded the 46-year-old died of "asphyxiation from sustained pressure."

Dr. Michael Baden, one of the experts part of the independent team, concluded "there is no other health issue that could cause or contribute to the death."
...}
What Did George Floyd's Autopsy Report Reveal About His Cause of Death? (newsweek.com)

What Did George Floyd's Autopsy Report Reveal About His Cause of Death?

The trial of former Minneapolis Police Department officer Derek Chauvin, who is accused of killing Floyd, begins on Monday

www.newsweek.com

 

[Rigby5]

The autopsy didn't find damaged tissues. How is that possible?

Here you go, buddy, the autopsy report.

https://www.hennepin.us/-/media/hennepinus/residents/public-safety/documents/floyd-autopsy-6-3-20.pdf

I. Blunt force injuries A. Cutaneous blunt force injuries of the forehead, face, and upper lip B. Mucosal injuries of the lips C. Cutaneous blunt force injuries of the shoulders, hands, elbows, and legs D. Patterned contusions (in some areas abraded) of the wrists, consistent with restraints (handcuffs)

As I have OFTEN posted!!!

"III. No life-threatening injuries identified A. No facial, oral mucosal, or conjunctival petechiae B. No injuries of anterior muscles of neck or laryngeal structures C. No scalp soft tissue, skull, or brain injuries D. No chest wall soft tissue injuries, rib fractures (other than a single rib fracture from CPR), vertebral column injuries, or visceral injuries E. Incision and subcutaneous dissection of posterior and lateral neck, shoulders, back, flanks, and buttocks negative for occult trauma.................

A. Blood drug and novel psychoactive substances screens: 1. Fentanyl 11 ng/mL 2. Norfentanyl 5.6 ng/mL 3. 4-ANPP 0.65 ng/mL 4. Methamphetamine 19 ng/mL 5. 11-Hydroxy Delta-9 THC 1.2 ng/mL; Delta-9 Carboxy THC 42 ng/mL; Delta-9 THC 2.9 ng/mL 6. Cotinine positive 7. Caffeine positive"

So NO LIFE THREATENING INJURIES but a shitload of drugs.................................and you want him CONVICTED???? Of what; handcuffing him???

Greg

I really think that's what the demofks think. I know in this thread they've stated several times they didn't understand the confrontation because Floyd didn't do anything. So basically they are saying fk the store owner who does he think he is.

You don't arrest someone over a questionable $20 bill.
You just give them a ticket.
The store clerk is a civil suit action, like you would do for fraud.
There is nothing to indicate Floyd was intentionally passing bad bills.

Post the link that says that. Also, a person impaired behind the wheel is an arrest offense

It is clear that even if one knowingly passes bad currency, it is a misdemeanor and not something you need to arrest a person over.
But since Floyd likely did not know if the bills were bad or not, it likely should not have been a crime at all.

{...
n Minnesota, penalties for knowingly passing or offering fake currency depend on the face value of the currency or the amount of property or services the person attempted to obtain. If the face value or property or services sought are less than $1,000, the crime is a misdemeanor with a maximum penalty of one year's jail time.
...}

Passing bad currency that someone passed to you and you were not aware, is not a crime.
Sitting behind the wheel while impaired, is not and CAN not be a crime.
They should not have arrested Floyd at all, and they likely would not have if he was white.

Post the statute

Minnesota Statutes 2020, Section 609.632 (mn.gov)

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.632/pdf

It says that if the person passing the bad bill does not realize it is bad, that it is then not a crime.

 

[gtopa1]

The autopsy didn't find damaged tissues. How is that possible?

Here you go, buddy, the autopsy report.

https://www.hennepin.us/-/media/hennepinus/residents/public-safety/documents/floyd-autopsy-6-3-20.pdf

I. Blunt force injuries A. Cutaneous blunt force injuries of the forehead, face, and upper lip B. Mucosal injuries of the lips C. Cutaneous blunt force injuries of the shoulders, hands, elbows, and legs D. Patterned contusions (in some areas abraded) of the wrists, consistent with restraints (handcuffs)

As I have OFTEN posted!!!

"III. No life-threatening injuries identified A. No facial, oral mucosal, or conjunctival petechiae B. No injuries of anterior muscles of neck or laryngeal structures C. No scalp soft tissue, skull, or brain injuries D. No chest wall soft tissue injuries, rib fractures (other than a single rib fracture from CPR), vertebral column injuries, or visceral injuries E. Incision and subcutaneous dissection of posterior and lateral neck, shoulders, back, flanks, and buttocks negative for occult trauma.................

A. Blood drug and novel psychoactive substances screens: 1. Fentanyl 11 ng/mL 2. Norfentanyl 5.6 ng/mL 3. 4-ANPP 0.65 ng/mL 4. Methamphetamine 19 ng/mL 5. 11-Hydroxy Delta-9 THC 1.2 ng/mL; Delta-9 Carboxy THC 42 ng/mL; Delta-9 THC 2.9 ng/mL 6. Cotinine positive 7. Caffeine positive"

So NO LIFE THREATENING INJURIES but a shitload of drugs.................................and you want him CONVICTED???? Of what; handcuffing him???

Greg

I really think that's what the demofks think. I know in this thread they've stated several times they didn't understand the confrontation because Floyd didn't do anything. So basically they are saying fk the store owner who does he think he is.

You don't arrest someone over a questionable $20 bill.
You just give them a ticket.
The store clerk is a civil suit action, like you would do for fraud.
There is nothing to indicate Floyd was intentionally passing bad bills.

Post the link that says that. Also, a person impaired behind the wheel is an arrest offense

It is clear that even if one knowingly passes bad currency, it is a misdemeanor and not something you need to arrest a person over.
But since Floyd likely did not know if the bills were bad or not, it likely should not have been a crime at all.

{...
n Minnesota, penalties for knowingly passing or offering fake currency depend on the face value of the currency or the amount of property or services the person attempted to obtain. If the face value or property or services sought are less than $1,000, the crime is a misdemeanor with a maximum penalty of one year's jail time.
...}

Passing bad currency that someone passed to you and you were not aware, is not a crime.
Sitting behind the wheel while impaired, is not and CAN not be a crime.
They should not have arrested Floyd at all, and they likely would not have if he was white.

"Sitting behind the wheel while impaired, is not and CAN not be a crime."

You sure about that? It's a crime here and should be. If you are impaired and in charge of a vehicle then you should be arrested; you are here!!! Also in the UK.

"
What does ‘drunk in charge’ of a vehicle mean?
To be guilty of being drunk in charge of a vehicle, you must be:

• In a public place
• Over the prescribed limit for alcohol, which in England and Wales is 35 micrograms of alcohol per 100ml of breath
• In charge of a vehicle

The first two points are easy to understand. Either you are in a public place, or you are not. Also, a breath test either shows that you are over the prescribed limit, or you are not. However, there is no set definition of what it means to be ‘in charge’ of a vehicle. The courts are reluctant to pinpoint precisely what constitutes being in charge of a vehicle. Typically, it is any situation in which:

• You have control of a vehicle, and
• There is a reasonable prospect that you will drive

What does being in control of a vehicle mean?
So, how do the courts determine if you were in control of a vehicle and if there was a reasonable prospect that you would drive? Again, there is no set definition. It all depends on the circumstances.

Usually, being in control of a vehicle means that you have the keys in your possession. In other words, you could have driven the car, had you wanted to. As to your intentions, this will come down to your behaviour on the day/night in question.

If the court decides that you did intend to drive, then the timeframe will be compared to the alcohol level in your system. So, you may say that you intended to drive the morning after the night before. But if your blood alcohol content would still have been above the prescribed limit, you will be guilty of the offence.

Examples of being drunk in charge
People are often caught out by a drunk in charge offence. Normally what happens is that they drink alcohol and then return to their vehicle for a temporary period. They may intend to sleep in the car, they may have lost their house keys, or they may have been separated from their friends. Whatever the reason, they are found in or near their vehicle while over the prescribed limit.

The keys might be in the ignition, whether through force of habit or to enable the operation of the windows or heating. However, this is not a prerequisite of being drunk in charge. The accused may have the keys in their pocket. They may even be curled up in the backseat or the passenger seat, rather than the driver’s seat.

There are numerous examples of what might amount to being ‘drunk in charge’. Every case depends on the circumstances. Ultimately, it comes down to whether you could technically have operated the car – because you had the keys on your person. And whether you intended to drive, either immediately or at some point in the future, while you were still over the legal limit."

Drunk in Charge of a Vehicle vs Drink Driving: What's the Difference?

Being drunk in charge means that you were in control of a vehicle while over the prescribed alcohol limit. This differs to drink driving.

www.ashmanssolicitors.com

Greg

 

[Rigby5]

I disagree, I think it was either :
second degree unintentional felony murder, third degree “depraved mind” murder,
------------------------------------------
Why: I read when the Chauvins that Chauvin continue pressure on the neck:


Our video investigation shows that Mr. Chauvin did not remove his knee even after Mr. Floyd lost consciousness and for a full minute and 20 seconds after paramedics arrived at the scene.

On June 3, Hennepin County prosecutors added a more serious second-degree murder charge against Mr. Chauvin and also charged each of the three other former officers — Thomas Lane, J. Alexander Kueng and Tou Thao — with aiding and abetting second-degree murder.
How George Floyd Was Killed in Police Custody - The New York Times (nytimes.com)

---------------------------------------
and now we heard his knee was on his neck for 9:29.

The paramedics found him dead at the scene.

View attachment 474968

He kept his knee on his neck when he became unconscious , 9 mins and 29 seconds, he is guilty as shit.

Is he?

Or is the system?

He is guilty of Manslaughter in my personal opinion.

Manslaughter is just a goof, but I think it is more than just a goof because he was trained to know that carotid and esophagus pressure is likely to cause harm and death.

 

[jc456]

Obstruction of the esophagus leaves no local marks, but it does kill brain cells, and that is what the coroner found

So do drugs

 

[Rigby5]

The autopsy didn't find damaged tissues. How is that possible?

Here you go, buddy, the autopsy report.

https://www.hennepin.us/-/media/hennepinus/residents/public-safety/documents/floyd-autopsy-6-3-20.pdf

I. Blunt force injuries A. Cutaneous blunt force injuries of the forehead, face, and upper lip B. Mucosal injuries of the lips C. Cutaneous blunt force injuries of the shoulders, hands, elbows, and legs D. Patterned contusions (in some areas abraded) of the wrists, consistent with restraints (handcuffs)

As I have OFTEN posted!!!

"III. No life-threatening injuries identified A. No facial, oral mucosal, or conjunctival petechiae B. No injuries of anterior muscles of neck or laryngeal structures C. No scalp soft tissue, skull, or brain injuries D. No chest wall soft tissue injuries, rib fractures (other than a single rib fracture from CPR), vertebral column injuries, or visceral injuries E. Incision and subcutaneous dissection of posterior and lateral neck, shoulders, back, flanks, and buttocks negative for occult trauma.................

A. Blood drug and novel psychoactive substances screens: 1. Fentanyl 11 ng/mL 2. Norfentanyl 5.6 ng/mL 3. 4-ANPP 0.65 ng/mL 4. Methamphetamine 19 ng/mL 5. 11-Hydroxy Delta-9 THC 1.2 ng/mL; Delta-9 Carboxy THC 42 ng/mL; Delta-9 THC 2.9 ng/mL 6. Cotinine positive 7. Caffeine positive"

So NO LIFE THREATENING INJURIES but a shitload of drugs.................................and you want him CONVICTED???? Of what; handcuffing him???

Greg

I really think that's what the demofks think. I know in this thread they've stated several times they didn't understand the confrontation because Floyd didn't do anything. So basically they are saying fk the store owner who does he think he is.

You don't arrest someone over a questionable $20 bill.
You just give them a ticket.
The store clerk is a civil suit action, like you would do for fraud.
There is nothing to indicate Floyd was intentionally passing bad bills.

Post the link that says that. Also, a person impaired behind the wheel is an arrest offense

It is clear that even if one knowingly passes bad currency, it is a misdemeanor and not something you need to arrest a person over.
But since Floyd likely did not know if the bills were bad or not, it likely should not have been a crime at all.

{...
n Minnesota, penalties for knowingly passing or offering fake currency depend on the face value of the currency or the amount of property or services the person attempted to obtain. If the face value or property or services sought are less than $1,000, the crime is a misdemeanor with a maximum penalty of one year's jail time.
...}

Passing bad currency that someone passed to you and you were not aware, is not a crime.
Sitting behind the wheel while impaired, is not and CAN not be a crime.
They should not have arrested Floyd at all, and they likely would not have if he was white.

"Sitting behind the wheel while impaired, is not and CAN not be a crime."

You sure about that? It's a crime here and should be. If you are impaired and in charge of a vehicle then you should be arrested; you are here!!! Also in the UK.

"
What does ‘drunk in charge’ of a vehicle mean?
To be guilty of being drunk in charge of a vehicle, you must be:

• In a public place
• Over the prescribed limit for alcohol, which in England and Wales is 35 micrograms of alcohol per 100ml of breath
• In charge of a vehicle

The first two points are easy to understand. Either you are in a public place, or you are not. Also, a breath test either shows that you are over the prescribed limit, or you are not. However, there is no set definition of what it means to be ‘in charge’ of a vehicle. The courts are reluctant to pinpoint precisely what constitutes being in charge of a vehicle. Typically, it is any situation in which:

• You have control of a vehicle, and
• There is a reasonable prospect that you will drive

What does being in control of a vehicle mean?
So, how do the courts determine if you were in control of a vehicle and if there was a reasonable prospect that you would drive? Again, there is no set definition. It all depends on the circumstances.

Usually, being in control of a vehicle means that you have the keys in your possession. In other words, you could have driven the car, had you wanted to. As to your intentions, this will come down to your behaviour on the day/night in question.

If the court decides that you did intend to drive, then the timeframe will be compared to the alcohol level in your system. So, you may say that you intended to drive the morning after the night before. But if your blood alcohol content would still have been above the prescribed limit, you will be guilty of the offence.

Examples of being drunk in charge
People are often caught out by a drunk in charge offence. Normally what happens is that they drink alcohol and then return to their vehicle for a temporary period. They may intend to sleep in the car, they may have lost their house keys, or they may have been separated from their friends. Whatever the reason, they are found in or near their vehicle while over the prescribed limit.

The keys might be in the ignition, whether through force of habit or to enable the operation of the windows or heating. However, this is not a prerequisite of being drunk in charge. The accused may have the keys in their pocket. They may even be curled up in the backseat or the passenger seat, rather than the driver’s seat.

There are numerous examples of what might amount to being ‘drunk in charge’. Every case depends on the circumstances. Ultimately, it comes down to whether you could technically have operated the car – because you had the keys on your person. And whether you intended to drive, either immediately or at some point in the future, while you were still over the legal limit."

Drunk in Charge of a Vehicle vs Drink Driving: What's the Difference?

Being drunk in charge means that you were in control of a vehicle while over the prescribed alcohol limit. This differs to drink driving.

www.ashmanssolicitors.com

Greg

I don't particularly care what weird laws someone may pass.
I am basing on what should be legal or not.
For example, if a person has a few drinks, the alcohol won't hit their blood stream right away, so they could be under the legal limit and able to drive.
But what if the person later starts to feel it, decides to pull over and stop, take a nap, and wait for the alcohol to pass?
Then clearly they have acted responsibly and have broken no law.
Anyone trying to arrest someone napping in the driver's seat, for being "in charge of a vehicle" while drunk, should be shot.
Clearly only a criminal would arrest a person who was being responsible and safe.

 

[Devils_Advocate]

I disagree, I think it was either :
second degree unintentional felony murder, third degree “depraved mind” murder,
------------------------------------------
Why: I read when the Chauvins that Chauvin continue pressure on the neck:


Our video investigation shows that Mr. Chauvin did not remove his knee even after Mr. Floyd lost consciousness and for a full minute and 20 seconds after paramedics arrived at the scene.

On June 3, Hennepin County prosecutors added a more serious second-degree murder charge against Mr. Chauvin and also charged each of the three other former officers — Thomas Lane, J. Alexander Kueng and Tou Thao — with aiding and abetting second-degree murder.
How George Floyd Was Killed in Police Custody - The New York Times (nytimes.com)

---------------------------------------
and now we heard his knee was on his neck for 9:29.

The paramedics found him dead at the scene.

View attachment 474968

He kept his knee on his neck when he became unconscious , 9 mins and 29 seconds, he is guilty as shit.

Is he?

Or is the system?

He is guilty of Manslaughter in my personal opinion.

Manslaughter is just a goof, but I think it is more than just a goof because he was trained to know that carotid and esophagus pressure is likely to cause harm and death.

Well it will be hard to get the other charges against him and I believe they will settle for manslaughter...

In the end the former Officer life is ruined which it should be and the death of Floyd could have been prevented had they called EMS first because it look like to me you can tell Floyd was on something and not faking it...

 

[jc456]

Manslaughter is just a goof, but I think it is more than just a goof because he was trained to know that carotid and esophagus pressure is likely to cause harm and death

No pressure was on the esophagus because Floyd was talking

 

[Rigby5]

Obstruction of the esophagus leaves no local marks, but it does kill brain cells, and that is what the coroner found

So do drugs

No, drugs leave evidence in organ failure and back up, like the kidneys.
No such evidence was found.

 

[jc456]

The autopsy didn't find damaged tissues. How is that possible?

Here you go, buddy, the autopsy report.

https://www.hennepin.us/-/media/hennepinus/residents/public-safety/documents/floyd-autopsy-6-3-20.pdf

I. Blunt force injuries A. Cutaneous blunt force injuries of the forehead, face, and upper lip B. Mucosal injuries of the lips C. Cutaneous blunt force injuries of the shoulders, hands, elbows, and legs D. Patterned contusions (in some areas abraded) of the wrists, consistent with restraints (handcuffs)

As I have OFTEN posted!!!

"III. No life-threatening injuries identified A. No facial, oral mucosal, or conjunctival petechiae B. No injuries of anterior muscles of neck or laryngeal structures C. No scalp soft tissue, skull, or brain injuries D. No chest wall soft tissue injuries, rib fractures (other than a single rib fracture from CPR), vertebral column injuries, or visceral injuries E. Incision and subcutaneous dissection of posterior and lateral neck, shoulders, back, flanks, and buttocks negative for occult trauma.................

A. Blood drug and novel psychoactive substances screens: 1. Fentanyl 11 ng/mL 2. Norfentanyl 5.6 ng/mL 3. 4-ANPP 0.65 ng/mL 4. Methamphetamine 19 ng/mL 5. 11-Hydroxy Delta-9 THC 1.2 ng/mL; Delta-9 Carboxy THC 42 ng/mL; Delta-9 THC 2.9 ng/mL 6. Cotinine positive 7. Caffeine positive"

So NO LIFE THREATENING INJURIES but a shitload of drugs.................................and you want him CONVICTED???? Of what; handcuffing him???

Greg

I really think that's what the demofks think. I know in this thread they've stated several times they didn't understand the confrontation because Floyd didn't do anything. So basically they are saying fk the store owner who does he think he is.

You don't arrest someone over a questionable $20 bill.
You just give them a ticket.
The store clerk is a civil suit action, like you would do for fraud.
There is nothing to indicate Floyd was intentionally passing bad bills.

Post the link that says that. Also, a person impaired behind the wheel is an arrest offense

It is clear that even if one knowingly passes bad currency, it is a misdemeanor and not something you need to arrest a person over.
But since Floyd likely did not know if the bills were bad or not, it likely should not have been a crime at all.

{...
n Minnesota, penalties for knowingly passing or offering fake currency depend on the face value of the currency or the amount of property or services the person attempted to obtain. If the face value or property or services sought are less than $1,000, the crime is a misdemeanor with a maximum penalty of one year's jail time.
...}

Passing bad currency that someone passed to you and you were not aware, is not a crime.
Sitting behind the wheel while impaired, is not and CAN not be a crime.
They should not have arrested Floyd at all, and they likely would not have if he was white.

"Sitting behind the wheel while impaired, is not and CAN not be a crime."

You sure about that? It's a crime here and should be. If you are impaired and in charge of a vehicle then you should be arrested; you are here!!! Also in the UK.

"
What does ‘drunk in charge’ of a vehicle mean?
To be guilty of being drunk in charge of a vehicle, you must be:

• In a public place
• Over the prescribed limit for alcohol, which in England and Wales is 35 micrograms of alcohol per 100ml of breath
• In charge of a vehicle

The first two points are easy to understand. Either you are in a public place, or you are not. Also, a breath test either shows that you are over the prescribed limit, or you are not. However, there is no set definition of what it means to be ‘in charge’ of a vehicle. The courts are reluctant to pinpoint precisely what constitutes being in charge of a vehicle. Typically, it is any situation in which:

• You have control of a vehicle, and
• There is a reasonable prospect that you will drive

What does being in control of a vehicle mean?
So, how do the courts determine if you were in control of a vehicle and if there was a reasonable prospect that you would drive? Again, there is no set definition. It all depends on the circumstances.

Usually, being in control of a vehicle means that you have the keys in your possession. In other words, you could have driven the car, had you wanted to. As to your intentions, this will come down to your behaviour on the day/night in question.

If the court decides that you did intend to drive, then the timeframe will be compared to the alcohol level in your system. So, you may say that you intended to drive the morning after the night before. But if your blood alcohol content would still have been above the prescribed limit, you will be guilty of the offence.

Examples of being drunk in charge
People are often caught out by a drunk in charge offence. Normally what happens is that they drink alcohol and then return to their vehicle for a temporary period. They may intend to sleep in the car, they may have lost their house keys, or they may have been separated from their friends. Whatever the reason, they are found in or near their vehicle while over the prescribed limit.

The keys might be in the ignition, whether through force of habit or to enable the operation of the windows or heating. However, this is not a prerequisite of being drunk in charge. The accused may have the keys in their pocket. They may even be curled up in the backseat or the passenger seat, rather than the driver’s seat.

There are numerous examples of what might amount to being ‘drunk in charge’. Every case depends on the circumstances. Ultimately, it comes down to whether you could technically have operated the car – because you had the keys on your person. And whether you intended to drive, either immediately or at some point in the future, while you were still over the legal limit."

Drunk in Charge of a Vehicle vs Drink Driving: What's the Difference?

Being drunk in charge means that you were in control of a vehicle while over the prescribed alcohol limit. This differs to drink driving.

www.ashmanssolicitors.com

Greg

I don't particularly care what weird laws someone may pass.
I am basing on what should be legal or not.
For example, if a person has a few drinks, the alcohol won't hit their blood stream right away, so they could be under the legal limit and able to drive.
But what if the person later starts to feel it, decides to pull over and stop, take a nap, and wait for the alcohol to pass?
Then clearly they have acted responsibly and have broken no law.
Anyone trying to arrest someone napping in the driver's seat, for being "in charge of a vehicle" while drunk, should be shot.
Clearly only a criminal would arrest a person who was being responsible and safe.

Cuckoo , stay in reality with us

 

[jc456]

No, drugs leave evidence in organ failure and back up, like the kidneys.
No such evidence was found

Drugs don’t kill brain cells? Huh, since when?

 

[Rigby5]

I disagree, I think it was either :
second degree unintentional felony murder, third degree “depraved mind” murder,
------------------------------------------
Why: I read when the Chauvins that Chauvin continue pressure on the neck:


Our video investigation shows that Mr. Chauvin did not remove his knee even after Mr. Floyd lost consciousness and for a full minute and 20 seconds after paramedics arrived at the scene.

On June 3, Hennepin County prosecutors added a more serious second-degree murder charge against Mr. Chauvin and also charged each of the three other former officers — Thomas Lane, J. Alexander Kueng and Tou Thao — with aiding and abetting second-degree murder.
How George Floyd Was Killed in Police Custody - The New York Times (nytimes.com)

---------------------------------------
and now we heard his knee was on his neck for 9:29.

The paramedics found him dead at the scene.

View attachment 474968

He kept his knee on his neck when he became unconscious , 9 mins and 29 seconds, he is guilty as shit.

Is he?

Or is the system?

He is guilty of Manslaughter in my personal opinion.

Manslaughter is just a goof, but I think it is more than just a goof because he was trained to know that carotid and esophagus pressure is likely to cause harm and death.

Well it will be hard to get the other charges against him and I believe they will settle for manslaughter...

In the end the former Officer life is ruined which it should be and the death of Floyd could have been prevented had they called EMS first because it look like to me you can tell Floyd was on something and not faking it...

Yes, I agree with that completely.
Attempting to arrest someone who is that high, instead of getting them to a medical facility, is irresponsible.

 

[Rigby5]

No, drugs leave evidence in organ failure and back up, like the kidneys.
No such evidence was found

Drugs don’t kill brain cells? Huh, since when?

Drugs are never known for targeting brain cells for death.
The way most drugs work is to release more dopamine, as a pleasure sensation.
If they are in an overdose that causes the whole respiratory system to fail, then all the organs show it, not just the brain.
Since the other organs did not show lack or oxygen, and only the brain did, then clearly death could only come from neck pressure on the carotid artery.

 

[Devils_Advocate]

I disagree, I think it was either :
second degree unintentional felony murder, third degree “depraved mind” murder,
------------------------------------------
Why: I read when the Chauvins that Chauvin continue pressure on the neck:


Our video investigation shows that Mr. Chauvin did not remove his knee even after Mr. Floyd lost consciousness and for a full minute and 20 seconds after paramedics arrived at the scene.

On June 3, Hennepin County prosecutors added a more serious second-degree murder charge against Mr. Chauvin and also charged each of the three other former officers — Thomas Lane, J. Alexander Kueng and Tou Thao — with aiding and abetting second-degree murder.
How George Floyd Was Killed in Police Custody - The New York Times (nytimes.com)

---------------------------------------
and now we heard his knee was on his neck for 9:29.

The paramedics found him dead at the scene.

View attachment 474968

He kept his knee on his neck when he became unconscious , 9 mins and 29 seconds, he is guilty as shit.

Is he?

Or is the system?

He is guilty of Manslaughter in my personal opinion.

Manslaughter is just a goof, but I think it is more than just a goof because he was trained to know that carotid and esophagus pressure is likely to cause harm and death.

Well it will be hard to get the other charges against him and I believe they will settle for manslaughter...

In the end the former Officer life is ruined which it should be and the death of Floyd could have been prevented had they called EMS first because it look like to me you can tell Floyd was on something and not faking it...

Yes, I agree with that completely.
Attempting to arrest someone who is that high, instead of getting them to a medical facility, is irresponsible.

Unfortunately today officers are not equipped to handle cases like the Floyd case...

First off it is not unusual for someone to accidentally pass a fake bill and I have yet to see evidence that Floyd knew or understood he had a fake bill before the attempt to arrest him.

Next, if someone is exhibiting stress like Floyd was then the lead Officer should have called for EMS and put Floyd on the ground sitting while waiting for EMS.

Finally, the long period that the officer kept his knee on Floyd is what will get him a guilty conviction but again my bet is manslaughter...

Note:

If the officer is not found guilty then expect massive riots and the country will burn...

 

[MisterBeale]

I disagree, I think it was either :
second degree unintentional felony murder, third degree “depraved mind” murder,
------------------------------------------
Why: I read when the Chauvins that Chauvin continue pressure on the neck:


Our video investigation shows that Mr. Chauvin did not remove his knee even after Mr. Floyd lost consciousness and for a full minute and 20 seconds after paramedics arrived at the scene.

On June 3, Hennepin County prosecutors added a more serious second-degree murder charge against Mr. Chauvin and also charged each of the three other former officers — Thomas Lane, J. Alexander Kueng and Tou Thao — with aiding and abetting second-degree murder.
How George Floyd Was Killed in Police Custody - The New York Times (nytimes.com)

---------------------------------------
and now we heard his knee was on his neck for 9:29.

The paramedics found him dead at the scene.

View attachment 474968

He kept his knee on his neck when he became unconscious , 9 mins and 29 seconds, he is guilty as shit.

Is he?

Or is the system?

He is guilty of Manslaughter in my personal opinion.

Voluntary or Involuntary?

Who are we to make these determinations from the propaganda we are fed?

I am not in the courtroom hearing the evidence, and I do not trust the MSM to tell us the full story of the trial. Nor do I trust folks that are educated by the legal system or the system of English Law.

I sense an ulterior motive of the establishment, but everyone believes, that when I read about reports in the press that indicate that there is much more going on. . . that I am just a bat shit crazy, tin foil hat wearing nutter. Whatever. I see what this incident has done to our nation, see how the corporate and government press is treating it, how it inflames social media, and then wonder if both the defense, prosecution, and judge actually want the full truth even known, much less the government and media.

. . . or if there is, indeed, a larger, more complex story going on, that has nothing to do with race, police power, class identity, etc.

George Floyd and cop who knelt on neck worked together at same club

Maya Santamaria (top right) says now-fired Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin (left) and George Floyd worked security at her club, El Nuevo Rodeo (bottom right) up until late last year.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Did George Floyd and Derek Chauvin know each other? Co-worker says they did

A man who claims to know George Floyd and Derek Chauvin, the fired officer facing second-degree murder charges in Floyd's death, has told CBS News in an exclusive interview that the two men had a history of not getting along when they worked a security detail at a Minneapolis cantina.

www.ajc.com

George Floyd, fired officer overlapped security shifts at south Minneapolis club

A former club owner in south Minneapolis says the now-fired police officer and the black man who died in his custody this week both worked security for her club up to the end of last year ...

kstp.com

George Floyd, fired officer overlapped security shifts at Minneapolis club

George Floyd and now-former Officer Derek Chauvin both worked security at the El Nuevo Rodeo club on

hotair.com

Minneapolis club owner: George Floyd, ex-cop Derek Chauvin both worked security at club

Maya Santamaria told KSTP in Minneapolis that Floyd and Chauvin both worked security at El Nuevo Rodeo in Minneapolis up to the end of last year. She could not be

www.fox23.com

 

[jc456]

No, drugs leave evidence in organ failure and back up, like the kidneys.
No such evidence was found

Drugs don’t kill brain cells? Huh, since when?

Drugs are never known for targeting brain cells for death.
The way most drugs work is to release more dopamine, as a pleasure sensation.
If they are in an overdose that causes the whole respiratory system to fail, then all the organs show it, not just the brain.
Since the other organs did not show lack or oxygen, and only the brain did, then clearly death could only come from neck pressure on the carotid artery.

So science lies?

that whole fried egg was not accurate?

so driving impaired is ok cause it doesn’t affect the brain! Wow I’d be suing someone

all those dui suspects