Minneapolis Cop Murders A Black Man

[SHOOTER12 8,787]

1 minute ago, Hate said:

She’s a cop. Surly/Shaggy has a long and glorious tradition of hating cops.

Username? Check, it fits...

[bolverk 29,391]

10 minutes ago, SHOOTER12 said:

OK, I'm going to re-hash some old grits over something that is stuck in my mind.

The strangler/killer cop when kneeliyon Mr. Floyds neck keeping his hand in his pants pocket.  Seems to me that wasn't just happenstance or coincidence.  Was he somehow pushing down on his thigh to apply more pressure, bracing himself somehow so he would be more stable while pinning Mr. Floyd?  It just seemed odd and there must be some nefarious reason that was done.

Thoughts? Any expert fighters on the Surl?

Possibly. I've also heard (maybe pseudo-psychology but in the body language interpretation world) that keeping your hand in your pocket can signal that subconsciously you're showing a lack of confidence, trying to conceal something internally, or are being defensive.

[mdmost 42,824]

10 minutes ago, HRSchenker said:

I really don't understand the hate she's getting. Her video comes across as a cry for help but not in the way she intended. She needs serious help if a bad interaction at McDonald's is causing so much grief. Whether it be a vacation or a visit with a physician, I hope she gets the help she needs. 

Her boss needs to pull her off the streets before something really bad happens. That video is definitely a cry for help. I honestly would not want her out patrolling the streets if she thinks someone at a gas station McDonalds is going to poison her McMuffin. She's a ticking time bomb. 

Edited June 17, 2020 by mdmost

[bolverk 29,391]

9 minutes ago, Hate said:

So do you think that the statues of Columbus that have been torn down were originally erected to celebrate the wrongs committed upon the indigenous people or was it erected to celebrate him finding the new world?

The latter. In another thread, I stated that I probably wouldn't take down the Columbus one in NYC because it's intent was to celebrate the 500th anniversary of the "discovery" of the New World. In this case, it's intent was to celebrate the conquest of New Mexico.

Edit: I understand that it's a very fine line to draw but I think that distinction matters. Besides, I doubt there was very much controversy when the Columbus statue was put up, but there certainly was in the case of Onate in New Mexico where there is still a large Native American population. People actively protested it being erected, which helps draw that distinction.

Edited June 17, 2020 by bolverk

[Burt Macklin 18,989]

35 minutes ago, JBJ said:

Point is, you can’t walk into a protest with a gun,

Sure you can.

Obviously this alone is legal, but I was clearly saying doing that in conjunction with his other actions, including committing the first crime and inciting the violence should not be allowed. You can’t just orphan off a single clause and then counter with, well that in isolation, is legal. 

 

35 minutes ago, JBJ said:

violently throw a woman to the ground,

in response to a battery from someone also in commission of felony (okay this is hard to steelman - that's pretty clear aggravated assault)

Who else are you claiming first committed battery exactly? The woman? 

35 minutes ago, JBJ said:

pepper spray the crowd.

use non-deadly force to deter a property felony...or if you meant it this way: in an attempt to flee

It’s not legal for a citizen to pepper spray a crowd, even if he were doing it to prevent a property felony, which he wasn’t because he used it after throwing the women to the ground to deter people from responding to that action. 

36 minutes ago, JBJ said:

And there will be charges and convictions, probably multiple.  But you can't decide in your head that the dude woke up with an elaborate plot to kill someone.

I don’t see where I said that at all. In fact, I specifically said at the outset he was unlikely to get any degree of murder that includes prior intent. My point is he’s going to have a hard time invoking self-defense when he came ready for a violent interaction and then he was the one who escalated the incident into a violent interaction and is now trying to claim the violence escalated to a point where he had to use deadly force in self-defense. At what point does his instigation of violence stop and he became someone who was solely trying to flee? IMO, there’s no gap where he’s not culpable for instigation, but someone could and will definitely argue there was a point where his proximate cause of the violence ended and he was then justified in his self-defense. 

I should clarify this was my opinion about what I think should happen . I’m not saying this is exactly how the case will play out. I could see any outcome from charges dropped to a degree of murder conviction, depending on a variety of factors, including whether prosecutors can put together a case for prior intent based on his prior statements, social media posts, etc.
 

1 hour ago, Casual Encounter said:

It will be an interesting case. He assaulted several people, then tried to flee. They chased him down, and instead of just trying to identify him, they assault him. One picture indicates the shooting victim may have had a knife, or similar object, in his hand. It may be determined that he was legitimately trying to flee and was attacked by a group of people, fearing for his life.

Either way, it seems he was there with the sole intention of escalating the situation until his firearm was “necessary” to defend himself.

yeah. It will be a very interesting case if it gets to play out fully, and will be almost guaranteed to get appealed regardless of the trial result. It seems to me this will test the limits of self-defense, but maybe there’s already case law to delineate this kind of incident. Not sure. Maybe a Crim lawyer can weigh in on this part.
 

 

[SA-KC_Horn 1,293]

Chase Bank is giving all employees a half day off this Friday for observance of BLM and Juneteenth.

 

[Js1 85,085]

16 minutes ago, HRSchenker said:

I really don't understand the hate she's getting. Her video comes across as a cry for help but not in the way she intended. She needs serious help if a bad interaction at McDonald's is causing so much grief. Whether it be a vacation or a visit with a physician, I hope she gets the help she needs. 

One issue might be that the cops keep lying about service workers trying to hurt them. The fake Starbucks cup “incident”, shake shack “poisoning,” etc.

[Js1 85,085]

Just now, SA-KC_Horn said:

Chase Bank is giving all employees a half day off this Friday for observance of BLM and Juneteenth.

 

My firm declared it a holiday for reflection of the struggles of the black community/civil rights and to celebrate their achievements and contributions to American society. 

[NeverMarryAStripper 21,781]

30 minutes ago, Hate said:

So do you think that the statues of Columbus that have been torn down were originally erected to celebrate the wrongs committed upon the indigenous people or was it erected to celebrate him finding the new world?

Should all be converted to statues of some Phoenician anyway

[Captainant 27,390]

18 minutes ago, Js1 said:

My firm declared it a holiday for reflection of the struggles of the black community/civil rights and to celebrate their achievements and contributions to American society. 

My employer is producing a bunch of bias and cultural training materials and requesting everyone clear their calendars to reflect and learn

[JBJ 3,648]

29 minutes ago, Burt Macklin said:

Obviously this alone is legal, but I was clearly saying doing that in conjunction with his other actions, including committing the first crime and inciting the violence should not be allowed. You can’t just orphan off a single clause and then counter with, well that in isolation, is legal. 

Who else are you claiming first committed battery exactly? The woman?

It’s not legal for a citizen to pepper spray a crowd, even if he were doing it to prevent a property felony, which he wasn’t because he used it after throwing the women to the ground to deter people from responding to that action. 

I don’t see where I said that at all. In fact, I specifically said at the outset he was unlikely to get any degree of murder that includes prior intent. My point is he’s going to have a hard time invoking self-defense when he came ready for a violent interaction and then he was the one who escalated the incident into a violent interaction and is now trying to claim the violence escalated to a point where he had to use deadly force in self-defense. At what point does his instigation of violence stop and he became someone who was solely trying to flee? IMO, there’s no gap where he’s not culpable for instigation, but someone could and will definitely argue there was a point where his proximate cause of the violence ended and he was then justified in his self-defense. 

I should clarify this was my opinion about what I think should happen . I’m not saying this is exactly how the case will play out. I could see any outcome from charges dropped to a degree of murder conviction, depending on a variety of factors, including whether prosecutors can put together a case for prior intent based on his prior statements, social media posts, etc.

yeah. It will be a very interesting case if it gets to play out fully, and will be almost guaranteed to get appealed regardless of the trial result. It seems to me this will test the limits of self-defense, but maybe there’s already case law to delineate this kind of incident. Not sure. Maybe a Crim lawyer can weigh in on this part.

The woman boxing him out is committing battery.  Simple battery is any offensive touching with or without the threat of harm. Because she's doing it as part of a felony it becomes aggravated assault or felonious assault (depending on whether NM distiguishes between the two and has this escalation).

You can use non-lethal force to stop a property crime.  And obviously you can use it in self-defense, which isn't at all clear when he actually did spray it.

----

FWIW, I don't think we disagree.  I think he ends up with 3rd degree or felony murder (is it confirmed the victim died?).  The more videos that come out with little pushes and shoves, the more likely the jury is going to consider the entirety of his actions as a continuum.  The ones beating him on the ground should be charged with felony murder as well.

If whatever crime tearing down a statue is in New Mexico is considered predicate for felony murder, there's probably a dozen more to charge but I don't think it really serves the public to do so.

Edited June 17, 2020 by JBJ

[JBJ 3,648]

If this isn't clear by now, I don't really like the felony murder rule to begin with.  At best, it's a cheap way to secure a murder charge for someone who maybe did commit murder but you don't want to bother proving.

[workswithseed 2,033]

49 minutes ago, Js1 said:

My firm declared it a holiday for reflection of the struggles of the black community/civil rights and to celebrate their achievements and contributions to American society. 

I actually can't believe it wasn't a US holiday anyways, if not a Texas holiday.

[Texas_Rocks 346]

OK, I'm going to re-hash some old grits over something that is stuck in my mind.
The strangler/killer cop when kneeliyon Mr. Floyds neck keeping his hand in his pants pocket.  Seems to me that wasn't just happenstance or coincidence.  Was he somehow pushing down on his thigh to apply more pressure, bracing himself somehow so he would be more stable while pinning Mr. Floyd?  It just seemed odd and there must be some nefarious reason that was done.
Thoughts? Any expert fighters on the Surl?

Search for the longer video. His hand was never in the pocket. He was wearing a black glove that just made it look like his hand was in his pocket against his dark pants. To your point, he is absolutely using that hand to center/balance as much of his upper body weight on the victims neck. In the longer video you can see him lose his balance(because he’s basically on one knee) and then momentarily remove his hand from his knee and rebalancing himself by placing that hand on the car. He also skillfully gets up on his left toe to focus most of his lower body weight on the neck. He’s deservedly fucked imo.

[atomheartbevo 89,390]

5 hours ago, TornACL said:

Honestly I can't believe this didn't happen a long time ago. I think even as kids we knew Aunt Jemima was at the very least, a weird as fuck idea for a brand. 

Also it's humorous to me how Quaker over the years has slowly modified the image of Aunt Jemima. Kind of how like Tom and Jerry cartoons redubbed the voice of the old maid who used to always whoop Tom's ass.

Next they are going to try and take Mavis Beacon off of the typing apps, even though that poor old woman (if she's even still alive and hasn't died of old age) was a....beacon for all.

[Wally Pryor 5,243]

1 hour ago, Js1 said:

My firm declared it a holiday for reflection of the struggles of the black community/civil rights and to celebrate their achievements and contributions to American society. 

Ours as well.     I think we must have done a cut and paste from the email your firm sent out. 

[bolverk 29,391]

18 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

I actually can't believe it wasn't a US holiday anyways, if not a Texas holiday.

https://www.officeholidays.com/amp/holidays/usa/texas/confederate-memorial-day

In Texas this holiday is called Confederate Heroes Day and held on January 19 each year. It has been a state holiday since 1973, when two existing state holidays: Confederate General Robert E. Lee's birthday on January 19 and the birthday of Jefferson Davis on June 3 were consolidated. In some years, it may fall on the same day as Martin Luther King Jr. Day.

I find it weird that we're still wrapped up in what amounts to a very short four-year period in our state's history to honor soldiers and their traitorous leaders in a losing effort to protect the "right" to own other humans.

[JBJ 3,648]

29 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

Next they are going to try and take Mavis Beacon off of the typing apps, even though that poor old woman (if she's even still alive and hasn't died of old age) was a....beacon for all.

And edit JEJ out of Return to put Hayden Christensen in.

Edited June 17, 2020 by JBJ

[SHOOTER12 8,787]

25 minutes ago, Texas_Rocks said:

Search for the longer video. His hand was never in the pocket. He was wearing a black glove that just made it look like his hand was in his pocket against his dark pants. To your point, he is absolutely using that hand to center/balance as much of his upper body weight on the victims neck. In the longer video you can see him lose his balance(because he’s basically on one knee) and then momentarily remove his hand from his knee and rebalancing himself by placing that hand on the car. He also skillfully gets up on his left toe to focus most of his lower body weight on the neck. He’s deservedly fucked imo.

Yes I definitely need to watch the longer video (closely), seems I missed a lot of the subtleties in the video.  It was pretty hard to watch and there may have been a subconscious effort not to look too closely.

[Foosters 17,724]

I still haven't watched it. I cant stand to watch any of them.  

[MNLonghornFUKM 8,799]

[SHOOTER12 8,787]

1 minute ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:

Hell I thought he was always kneeling.

[Moby Ric 2,058]

1 minute ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:

How will anyone be able to tell if he is kneeling or not?

[Brisketexan 104,532]

3 minutes ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:

Kyler Murray? Kneeling?  How will we even be able to tell?

Dammit, too slow on the trigger.  And I'm not even an original thinker -- in fairness, that's an EASY layup.

Edited June 17, 2020 by Brisketexan

[CurlyDumps 4,439]

If his teammates are kneeling too, he should stand on his tiptoes so it looks like he's kneeling with them.

[MNLonghornFUKM 8,799]

Lulz too easy

[Gatorubet 30,082]

She’s a cop. Surly/Shaggy has a long and glorious tradition of hating cops.

Bernard thread would be at page 1000

[XYZ 2,154]

So, cop who killed Atlanta man is charged with murder.

[youdunnf'dup 2,147]

3 hours ago, XYZ said:

So, cop who killed Atlanta man is charged with murder.

I saw that. I can’t wait for this case to explode. I personally think this guy should be charged with something, but am I crazy for thinking he’s going to get off with absolutely nothing and walk free? They’re going to argue until they’re blue in the face that a taser is a deadly weapon when in the hands of an untrained civilian. IMO, that’s horse shit, but that’s what they’re going to argue. Isn’t that going to be the loophole that this guy needs to get out of this?

 

I get it man, being a cop is on the short list for most stressful jobs. But dude is literally running away from you and he’s yards away from hog with no sign of turning around to be a threat to you? Shooting in that situation just seems crazy to me. But that’s the loophole this guy needed. 

Edited June 18, 2020 by youdunnf'dup

[Seasick Sailor 3,747]

 

[ImissWallyPryor 9,045]

35 minutes ago, youdunnf'dup said:

I saw that. I can’t wait for this case to explode. I personally think this guy should be charged with something, but am I crazy for thinking he’s going to get off with absolutely nothing and walk free? They’re going to argue until they’re blue in the face that a taser is a deadly weapon when in the hands of an untrained civilian. IMO, that’s horse shit, but that’s what they’re going to argue. Isn’t that going to be the loophole that this guy needs to get out of this?

 

I get it man, being a cop is on the short list for most stressful jobs. But dude is literally running away from you and he’s yards away from hog with no sign of turning around to be a threat to you? Shooting in that situation just seems crazy to me. But that’s the loophole this guy needed. 

He sure looked to me to turn back and point the taser at the cop. The defense will argue that had the cop been incapacitated by the taser, the suspect could disarm him and use the gun on the cop. It will be tough getting 12 people to convict on the murder charge. However, some may be willing to sacrifice him to avoid riots, or they will make sure to convict him of other charges. That might be where we are now. 

[youdunnf'dup 2,147]

5 minutes ago, ImissWallyPryor said:

He sure looked to me to turn back and point the taser at the cop. The defense will argue that had the cop been incapacitated by the taser, the suspect could disarm him and use the gun on the cop. It will be tough getting 12 people to convict on the murder charge. However, some may be willing to sacrifice him to avoid riots, or they will make sure to convict him of other charges. That might be where we are now. 

If you watch the video, he was running away and kinda twisted his body as he was running and pointed the taser. 

1. Wasn’t the other cop right there? That scenario seems so unrealistic.

2. He was shot in the back. How threatening is a person when they’re running away and you shoot them in the back. 
 

I agree that there’s no way you’re convincing 12 people. He’ll get off, and the riots will happen. It’s so predictable, but it’s absolutely going to happen 

[BNB 100]

This could be an interesting night. According to Twitter Atlanta PD is calling in sick or not answering calls.

[scottsins 1,953]

If you watch the video, he was running away and kinda twisted his body as he was running and pointed the taser. 
1. Wasn’t the other cop right there? That scenario seems so unrealistic.
2. He was shot in the back. How threatening is a person when they’re running away and you shoot them in the back. 
 
I agree that there’s no way you’re convincing 12 people. He’ll get off, and the riots will happen. It’s so predictable, but it’s absolutely going to happen 

The indictment contains a bunch of lesser insiders so I’m thinking that something will land.

[Braff Zacklin 13,406]

Latest I read suggests the taser was no longer functional because it had been fired twice. That's probably the biggest contributing factor to the murder charge.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/06/17/rayshard-brooks-garrett-rolfe-allegations-atlanta/3209036001/

Brooks made some extremely poor choices, but I still contend the officer murdered him up because the officer felt humiliated that Brooks had stolen his taser and gotten away.

[scottsins 1,953]

This could be an interesting night. According to Twitter Atlanta PD is calling in sick or not answering calls.

Wow. They really take that oath seriously.

[youdunnf'dup 2,147]

1 minute ago, scottsins said:

The indictment contains a bunch of lesser insiders so I’m thinking that something will land.

Gotcha. Not gonna lie I didn’t really look into the charges. I just heard he was charged with some for murder, and that just doesn’t seem realistic at all. 

[Ignatius 3,999]

18 minutes ago, ImissWallyPryor said:

He sure looked to me to turn back and point the taser at the cop. The defense will argue that had the cop been incapacitated by the taser, the suspect could disarm him and use the gun on the cop. It will be tough getting 12 people to convict on the murder charge. However, some may be willing to sacrifice him to avoid riots, or they will make sure to convict him of other charges. That might be where we are now. 

If ‘where we are’ is a cop gets charged with murder for shooting a drunk dude in the back for grabbing his taser, I’m fine with that....

[Braff Zacklin 13,406]

1 minute ago, scottsins said:

Wow. They really take that oath seriously.

They've sworn to protect (each other) and serve (each other's interests) ...

[MNLonghornFUKM 8,799]

Time to get out those social workers for those domestic disputes to help “smooth things out”

[Ignatius 3,999]

2 minutes ago, Braff Zacklin said:

Latest I read suggests the taser was no longer functional because it had been fired twice. That's probably the biggest contributing factor to the murder charge.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/06/17/rayshard-brooks-garrett-rolfe-allegations-atlanta/3209036001/

Brooks made some extremely poor choices, but I still contend the officer murdered him up because the officer felt humiliated that Brooks had stolen his taser and gotten away.

I would totally buy this; the cop would have shot a white guy in the back under the same circumstances. 100K question is whether the same thing happens to the cop under each scenario....

[Brisketexan 104,532]

Wow. They really take that oath seriously.

Yeah, I mean...I’m convinced. These are ABSOLUTELY the guys we should trust with our lives without question, and simply thank them for their service. Upstanding men of great character who truly live to protect and serve - they’ve got my vote!

[Telegraph_it 3,353]

This probably will (not) help. (Depending on your viewpoint.)
 

 

[ImissWallyPryor 9,045]

4 minutes ago, Telegraph_it said:

This probably will (not) help. (Depending on your viewpoint.)
 

 

I was about to post this. 

[Seasick Sailor 3,747]

10 minutes ago, Telegraph_it said:

This probably will (not) help. (Depending on your viewpoint.)
 

 

It'll come down to the functionality of the taser after being fired twice. 

[Neonmoon 38,127]

If a taser is considered a deadly weapon, why is it used on citizens? 

[utee94 15,742]

50 minutes ago, Braff Zacklin said:

Latest I read suggests the taser was no longer functional because it had been fired twice. That's probably the biggest contributing factor to the murder charge.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/06/17/rayshard-brooks-garrett-rolfe-allegations-atlanta/3209036001/

Brooks made some extremely poor choices, but I still contend the officer murdered him up because the officer felt humiliated that Brooks had stolen his taser and gotten away.

 

16 minutes ago, Telegraph_it said:

This probably will (not) help. (Depending on your viewpoint.)
 

 

 

5 minutes ago, Seasick Sailor said:

It'll come down to the functionality of the taser after being fired twice. 

The authorities are withholding judgment until this guys weighs in:

 

 

[ImissWallyPryor 9,045]

2 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

If a taser is considered a deadly weapon, why is it used on citizens? 

I think it is considered “less lethal” or something like that. Guns are also used on citizens, usually with good reason. 

[youdunnf'dup 2,147]

9 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

If a taser is considered a deadly weapon, why is it used on citizens? 

No this was explained to me. The difference is he’s a trained civilian. It isn’t a deadly weapon when in the hands of a cop. It is when in the hands of anyone else, according to Georgia state law. That is my understanding of how that law works, which is ridiculous IMO

Edited June 18, 2020 by youdunnf'dup

[Gatorubet 30,082]

6 minutes ago, ImissWallyPryor said:

I think it is considered “less lethal” or something like that. Guns are also used on citizens, usually with good reason.