Tuesday, June 2, 2020

Now They Tell Us

Via ABCNews:
MINNEAPOLIS -- A medical examiner on Monday classified George Floyd’s death as a homicide, saying his heart stopped as police restrained him and compressed his neck, in a widely seen video that has sparked protests across the nation.

“Decedent experienced a cardiopulmonary arrest while being restrained by law enforcement officer(s),” the Hennepin County Medical Examiner's Office said in a news release. Cause of death was listed as “cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint and neck compression.”

Under "other significant conditions” it said Floyd suffered from heart disease and hypertension, and listed fentanyl intoxication and recent methamphetamine use. Those factors were not listed under cause of death.

What could go wrong with mixing fentanyl and meth? Says the NYT:

Dr. Giroir said combining meth and fentanyl could be the most dangerous move of all, although researchers are still trying to figure out how the drugs work together.

“We definitely want to dissuade people from the notion that somehow a downer and an upper cancel each other out,” he said. “Early data suggests the combination is probably more deadly than the sum of its parts.”

The abuse of this stimulant [meth] is related to many cardiovascular disorders and adverse events. 

Opioid use over time may also aggravate the risk of cardiovascular disease by elevating the biochemical hallmarks of disorders related to these conditions.

I've read that he was trying to get into his car when he was arrested.

Imagine the pressure on the medical examiner to call the death a homicide. But it might not be so simple as that--which is the way reality often is. OTOH, a lot of people got a lot of free stuff in the meantime.


  1. Well said, your last paragraph.


  2. I think that trying to pass counterfeit money might be stressful for a person's heart.

    1. True, and being arrested is a lot more stressful that that. Bad combo--fentanyl and meth habit with underlying conditions, and then being arrested. Resisting under those conditions makes it all much worse.

  3. Baden says asphyxia.

    1. Baden is a for- profit hired gun who thrives on publicity…and celebrity.

  4. What do you make of the nonchalance by the police and even the EMTs in the video?

    I don't know if there's enough to take it as far as sundance does, but I'm getting more comfortable with the idea that this was a hit of some sort.

    1. sorry about that...I just assumed you had seen it.


      "There is no justification for Chauvin’s action and the seemingly cavalier attitude by those who were at the scene of the events. Outrage and emotional reaction over the video of the events is not surprising; but the riots, arson and looting are another level of troubling.

      "Officer Derek Chauvin and victim George Lloyd knew each-other. Chauvin was a security officer for a sketchy dance club named El Nuevo Rodeo, and had worked there for 17 years. Chauvin worked for El Nuevo Rodeo cantina and dance club longer than he was a police officer. Mr. George Lloyd also worked at the restaurant/dance club as a bouncer, for several years. Chauvin and Lloyd knew eachother.

      "The dynamic of the relationship between Lloyd and Chauvin is divergent from the media narrative. Additionally, the media presentation of the club, and ownership, is also materially flawed.

      "The club is not what appears visible on the surface; neither is the relationship between the two men who both worked there. CTH has reviewed the background, and made a decision to exit the rabbit hole. Suffice to say it’s better to just sit this one out and watch."

      "The casual and familiar nature of the participants, in combination with what the “paramedics” do not do when they arrive on scene, seems to tell a larger story."

      And then:

      "Could the way Chauvin, and the responders writ large, interacted with George Floyd have been an outcropping of concern that Floyd was putting the ENR operation at risk?

      "Read the indictment. Everything was cool until the responding officers attempted to put Floyd in Derek Chauvin’s squad car. Floyd is presented as being ok with the arrest stuff; but really, really, didn’t want to get in Derek’s car.

      "17-years as a “security officer” for El Nuevo Rodeo. Was Chauvin the enforcer?

      "Does that explain why everyone seems casual, even the responding EMT’s?"

    2. No possible way I can comment on that.

    3. mistercr, it has already been clarified that Floyd was not to get into Chauvin’s car, but another officer’s car. Have seen nothing more on the story put out about the Mexican restaurant/bar/dance place’s asserted alter ego...

    4. That's fine. It's quite a can of worms, if not a total rabbit hole.

      But, for me, the most bizarre aspect is the total lack of concern by both police and EMTs as seen in the video.

      At no point does anyone say, "aw, s**t! What just happened?!"

      The narrative has been "a callous disregard..." and that is certainly possible, but it strains credulity to think that every individual involved shared in the inhumane feeling.

  5. More on the Gentle Giant (being arrested again would have definitely caused him stress):

    The head of the Minneapolis police union says George Floyd’s “violent criminal history” needs to be remembered and that the protests over his death are the work of a “terrorist movement.”

    “What is not being told is the violent criminal history of George Floyd. The media will not air this,” police union president Bob Kroll told his members in a letter posted Monday on Twitter.

    Floyd had landed five years behind bars in 2009 for an assault and robbery two years earlier, and before that, had been convicted of charges ranging from theft with a firearm to drugs, the Daily Mail reported.

    1. "What is not being told is the violent criminal history of George Floyd. The media will not air this"

      Once the preferred narrative has been set in stone and the "hero" lionized, the truth is buried in an unmarked grave in potter's field. Everybody could know, but none will speak of it. History is filled with lies.

  6. More on meth/fentanyl:

    FRIDAY, Jan. 3, 2020 (HealthDay News) -- A study of over 1 million urine drug tests from across the United States shows soaring rates of use of methamphetamines and fentanyl, often used together in potentially lethal ways.

    The drug test results came primarily from clinics dealing with primary care, pain management or substance abuse disorders.

    The results showed that between 2013 and 2019, urine samples testing positive for methamphetamine ("meth") have skyrocketed sixfold, from about 1.4% of samples testing positive in 2013 to about 8.4% in 2019.

    “…often used together in potentially lethal ways.”

    1. The ME report cites "fentanyl intoxication," not merely the detection of the presence of fentanyl in the blood, but levels considered toxic, which could cause cardiac arrest alone. Medically, toxic means capable of causing death or serious debilitation when ingested and absorbed.

      We're too conditioned by everyday vernacular use of intoxication, meaning harmlessly drunk, when associated with alcohol consumption, to recognize death as the usual and likely result of intoxication when used medically.

      Too much is an overdose, fatal consumption is intoxication.

    2. Thank you. And then add the meth into the equation.

  7. No matter what, the police officers in this did wrong that helped contribute to Floyd’s death.

    There is nothing that can attenuate their actions. Nothing.

    Kneeling on a suspect’s neck that was handcuffed is wrong. I know for a fact that kneeling on a person’s back as you would do in the universally taught “hand cuff control position” restricts your ability to breathe. Police all over practice that, but not the neck kneeling.

    You do not mess with the neck and other specific areas unless you are in a life and death fight. Sorry, they were not.

    Worse, than they ignored his complaints of breathing difficulties and that is wrong.

    Did any of these officers set out to kill a black suspect and or any suspect? Seriously doubt it.

    Does this justify the rioting, looting, and seriously hurting innocents? No, not even slightly.

    Criminals are human even if they fight back.

    - TexasDude

    1. The technique was apparently approved by the PD, and it seems it's fairly widely used in other places as well. That's not to say it's a good idea.

    2. Maybe, but never in my 16 year career have I ever been told, taught, or advised to kneel on anyone’s neck.

      - TexasDude

    3. (CNN)In the years leading up to George Floyd's death with his neck beneath the knee of a Minneapolis policeman, at least 58 people lost consciousness after the city's officers put them in neck restraints, according to a CNN analysis of use of force data from the police department.

      Officers used neck restraints on 428 people since 2012, and 14% lost consciousness, the data showed. That means the procedure, which is restricted or banned in many large police departments around the country, was used an average of about once a week in the city over that time period.

    4. So it probably wasn't just Chauvin.

    5. Ahh ... ok ... neck restraints. Yes. Aka choke holds or vascular/respiratory neck restraints.

      Yes. At one time I was taught that. Not any more. Why? Lethality and liability.

      The restraints are by arms/hands. I knew and taught them in karate. Yes, you can use your legs to, but that is not normal practice save for MMA.

      Kneeling on neck of someone handcuffed? No.

      - TexasDude

    6. "never... have I ever been told, taught, or advised to kneel on anyone’s neck."
      Of course.
      Seeing as there was more than one cop at the scene, it was possible to restrain the subject, by one cop kneeling on each shoulder.
      Only if the subject resists, do the cops move things up a rung, as per the Use of Force Model, of Desmedt and Marsh, 1982.

    7. Ok, seeing this discussion about neck restraint techniques and frequency, I realize that it's far more likely that they were trying to render him unconscious in order to facilitate transporting him.

      My apologies for bringing up an execution scenario up-thread. It's pretty unlikely that all of the police and EMTs could have been equally involved in such a plot.

      I guess Floyd must have had a pulse when they transferred him.

    8. I actually don't think they were trying to render him unconscious. If they had been trying to do that, Chauvin would have stood up once he was unconscious. I suspect he thought Floyd had simply calmed down a bit from his drug induced frenzy.

    9. A big problem is that so far there is no video evidence of that drug induced frenzy. I saw one five minute video, which was very calm, the initial stop I suppose, at the end of which Floyd was being walked across the street (to where or why I don't know).

      Next video is the one that precipitated the riots. So, as in the Nixon tapes, there is a gap. Not that any of anything will make a difference. Chauvin is going to be sacrificed. He may even deserve it. Optics are everything.

    10. "No matter what, the police officers in this did wrong that helped contribute to Floyd’s death."

      No question about it. Yes, he had a record of being a criminal and thug, and it doesn't appear that he had reformed his ways, but we don't permit law enforcement in this country to murder even the worst of society in the street. Nor does such an event grant terrorists and common criminals permission to incite riots, loot, destroy, assault, murder, and otherwise engage in violent mass mayhem. Period.

  8. The use of these holds can be very lethal and are problematic. I was taught them in karate long before being a cop.

    One hold restricts/stops blood flow in one or both carotid arteries in the neck. Generally, you are on the back of the person and your elbow is below the chin. Your forearm and your biceps cut off the blood to the brain. This is the safer restraint, but cutting of the blood too long will cause permanent brain injury or death. There is a kid’s game in which they do it to themselves or others till they black out.

    You see this hold or variations of in MMA and professional wrestling along with traditional martial arts and military training.

    The other version has the forearm, from the rear, across the throat. This is very dangerous.

    I have never been taught to kneel on anyone’s neck.

    If kneeling on a suspect’s neck was truly taught as a valid technique in that the department, then the department, the city, and whoever taught or advised this, from within the department to private individuals or groups/companies, and those using them are now open to civil suits at the least.

    The goal is to stop aggression and/or gain compliance and even with that there are lines, restrictions.

    - TexasDude

    1. 5-311 USE OF NECK RESTRAINTS AND CHOKE HOLDS (10/16/02) (08/17/07) (10/01/10) (04/16/12)


      Choke Hold: Deadly force option. Defined as applying direct pressure on a person’s trachea or airway (front of the neck), blocking or obstructing the airway (04/16/12)

      Neck Restraint: Non-deadly force option. Defined as compressing one or both sides of a person’s neck with an arm or leg, without applying direct pressure to the trachea or airway (front of the neck). Only sworn employees who have received training from the MPD Training Unit are authorized to use neck restraints. The MPD authorizes two types of neck restraints: Conscious Neck Restraint and Unconscious Neck Restraint. (04/16/12)

      Conscious Neck Restraint: The subject is placed in a neck restraint with intent to control, and not to render the subject unconscious, by only applying light to moderate pressure. (04/16/12)

      Unconscious Neck Restraint: The subject is placed in a neck restraint with the intention of rendering the person unconscious by applying adequate pressure. (04/16/12)


      The Conscious Neck Restraint may be used against a subject who is actively resisting. (04/16/12)
      The Unconscious Neck Restraint shall only be applied in the following circumstances: (04/16/12)
      On a subject who is exhibiting active aggression, or;
      For life saving purposes, or;
      On a subject who is exhibiting active resistance in order to gain control of the subject; and if lesser attempts at control have been or would likely be ineffective.
      Neck restraints shall not be used against subjects who are passively resisting as defined by policy. (04/16/12)
      After Care Guidelines (04/16/12)
      After a neck restraint or choke hold has been used on a subject, sworn MPD employees shall keep them under close observation until they are released to medical or other law enforcement personnel.
      An officer who has used a neck restraint or choke hold shall inform individuals accepting custody of the subject, that the technique was used on the subject.

  9. Floyd may have died no matter what due to what was in his system coupled with his health issues.

    The officers, though, were still wrong and contributed directly or indirectly to his death by action and indifference.

    Stuff like this makes my job harder.

    - TexasDude

  10. "Floyd may have died no matter what due to what was in his system coupled with his health issues.

    "The officers ... contributed ... indirectly to his death"

    What kind of homicide is that? Floyd also contributed to his own death.

    1. If Floyd had not 1) had a habit of using illegal and highly dangerous drugs, while also 2) engaging in criminal conduct, he 3) would never have been in the position of having a cop trying to restrain him in any way, shape, or form. But now the cop will be tried for homicide.

    2. Tried for homicide, most likely. A conviction will depend on the skill of his defense lawyer.

      If he is not convicted we will have more riots.

    3. Ya living in the past. That attitude does not justify what occurred. Period. That thinking will eventually cost you your job and freedom as this event has done. You may not like it, you may not want it, but it’s reality.

      - TexasDude

    4. "But now the cop will be tried for homicide"

      His actions were negligent, at best. An individual restrained in such a way that they are unable to breathe will unavoidably begin to move forcefully in an attempt to get air. The restraining officer(s) will perceive that as continued resistance and apply increased force.

    5. "restrained in such a way that they are unable to breathe"

      But that's the question. Did the restraint render him unable to breathe or did cardiopulmonary problems--very likely caused by the drugs--cause that sensation. Medical examiner said death was not caused by asphyxia. I'm not suggesting the restraint was a good idea, but that when its use is authorized a homicide charge appears unjust. The video is not reported to show at any point that Chauvin was forcefully applying the restraint so much as "nonchalantly" maintaining the position. I say that not as a defense per se but because it tends to show intent or lack of intent.

    6. To clarify, I'm saying that it's difficult to call the cop's actions "negligent at best" because,

      1. He was employing an authorized technique;
      2. I would bet that he had used it many times in the past, and there had been no deaths from it;
      3. He doesn't appear to have applied the technique in an unusual way.

      There's a legit argument to be made that the PD is at fault for authorizing a technique that is widely banned because of difficulty in applying it properly.

      Everyone who wasn't there thinks they know what happened there, just because they've seen some video footage. But despite the fairly lengthy footage it isn't complete, nor are other relevant facts completely known--we didn't know about the substance intoxication, for example.

      I'm cautioning against rushing to judgment against this particular cop.

    7. This is a very tough time to be a cop. They are expected to be perfect at all times. They see the worst men and the worst of men. They are human and have to make split-second decisions.

      When they mess up, we are ready to hang them. When they are killed, we are ready to canonize them. How many of us would stand as the thin blue line?

      I don't defend them when they are wrong. I also don't rush to judgment.

      I wish just once that ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC and CNN would show the horrible verbal abuse where out of control lunatics get in their faces and say terrible things to them. Man, I'm not there and I get angry. Imagine how they must feel.

      TexasDude, I salute you. I don't 100% agree with your comments on this subject, but I appreciate you sharing them.

    8. Valid points, Mark. If the ME is correct, that would ostensibly exclude the restraint technique as COD. Thus, how could it be homicide?

      However, the witnesses who were notably farther from Floyd than Chauvin claim they could hear him saying he couldn't breathe. Being familiar with the sometimes peculiar dynamics of adrenaline-infused kinetic situations, I don't automatically conclude that Chauvin must have heard it just because he was in direct physical contact. But if he did, or was made aware, what responsibility did he have to ensure that Floyd, who was in police custody, was not experiencing a medical emergency?

    9. 1. I assume that a 17 year cop responds based on his experience. I haven't heard his side, or the side of the other police who were present. Have you?

      2. Nor do I know that he didn't respond to Floyd's pleas. Neither Floyd nor Chauvin were medical personnel and both may have interpreted Floyd's felt symptoms differently--and mistakenly. That doesn't make Chauvin negligent. But I wasn't there.

      3. I'm willing to wait before passing judgment. I'm willing to acknowledge that one video may not tell the whole story.

    10. Again, to be clear--I'm not necessarily defending Chauvin. There are elements of his past--some continuing to the present--that could be significant. But we shouldn't be too quick to think we know what really happened just because part of it appeared on a video.

  11. One autopsy found no relation to his death, the other did.

    Make that of what you will.

    Regarding training ...

    I don’t see a thing about knee to neck. A leg, but no knee. Also, it’s to stop aggression. Exactly what aggression was the officer stopping for such a long duration, handcuffed no less?

    - TexasDude

    1. My assumption is that, having failed to get him into the squad car due to his active resistance, he was being restrained while they awaited an alternate form of transport--a paddy wagon of some sort. It seems clear that they were standing around--or kneeling--waiting for something.

      "Aggression" is your choice of words. Active resistance, enough despite the handcuffs that they were unable to secure him in the squad car, is the accurate description.

      The knee is part of the leg, just as the elbow is part of the arm. I'm right about that.

    2. Small detail. “Active resistance” by a great big guy - 6’6 and very muscular, who was also significantly intoxicated due to heavy-duty drugs, could be more than a handful when it came to restraining him. None of the police officers appeared to be very big. A similar situation occurred with Rodney King, a very big guy, out of his head on PCP...

    3. Well, but he was a "gentle giant," wasn't he? All those drugs and his past arrests for things like armed robbery are pretty meaningless once you understand his fundamental gentleness. Right?

    4. To continue the standard narrative, he was fun loving, made everyone laugh, and was getting his life together. Until he had the misfortune of running into a white cop.

  12. Sigh, OK. I do this for a living and have been in situations in which a handcuff person is flailing about. I have never placed a knee or even an arm on a neck!

    You do what occurred with Floyd, you will lose your freedom. Simple as that.

    At one time police could arrest any fleeing felon by shooting them dead. At one time, police can have an illegal encounter and any other crimes found subsequently were valid. At one time, you could tune people up for talking bad to your face.

    At one time ...

    Police create their, mine, own restrictions by these kinds of actions. Floyd is just another in a long line.

    I am telling you with the sincerest of hearts, there is no justification for Floyd.

    - TexasDude

  13. It doesn't matter if there is justification. Chauvin was a dead man before Floyd was pronounced legally dead. The instant that video uploaded Chauvin was convicted and sentenced.

    I commented several posts ago that social media has reached its peak by being able to create the ultimate lynch mob. I was being neither facetious nor hyperbolic. The national discussion has nothing to do with guilt or innocence of murder but merely a debate about which limb to throw the rope over. Fully 90% of America has watched the video and now views themselves as eyewitnesses and guess what, that's his jury pool. Notice that there have been no remarks by Chauvin's attorney. Possibly he hasn't an attorney. The only thing more futile or dumber than Chauvin giving himself up, rather than just eating a bullet, would be for someone to voluntarily attempt to defend him. Who wants that infamy, much less humiliation? Chauvin will surely get due process, and that's ironic in that BLM's core argument is that 'process' is not a synonym for justice. He was duly arrested, duly charged, will be duly tried, duly sentenced, to the maximum allowed by law, duly incarcerated, and duly executed before he completes the first year of his sentence (my money is on him surviving less than 6 months) and everyone will feel righteous because he had "due process". He has no hope of a fair trial because everyone has seen it for themselves and "knows" all of the facts.

    I do not live in Minnesota and truly could give a rat's ass about the case. It's none of my put in because I was not there and it isn't my "jurisdiction", but I am deeply ashamed of America over this. We had our "Ox Bow Incident" and failed totally and collectively.

    At the most basic level this is proof positive that America no longer even pretends to understand Christianity; but specifically it demonstrates what a cancer social media is on the Body Politic. This is the ultimate "cancel culture", certainly Chauvin had his claim to humanity cancelled, and we will be seeing a great deal more of it. The most salient fact about Ba'al is that no matter how many sacrifices he consumes, he is always ravenous for more.

    Kafka, Orwell, and Huxley did not have enough imagination to describe the horrors that stand upon the stoop.
    Tom S.

    1. "Fully 90% of America has watched the video and now views themselves as eyewitnesses"

      This is a problem. Another problem, police are put in a damned if you do damned if you don't position by society as a whole--all coming from multiple perspectives. The same people who call them heroes will condemn a cop quickly in the face of a public outcry, without knowing all the facts. The same people who call cops racists and help make the police job so difficult, will also decry crime.

      I'm not saying there are no solutions, nor that we can't tell right from wrong in individual cases--far from it. But the rush to judgment is wrong.

    2. LOL, my comment above at 8:30 AM and your comment here express the same sentiment.

    3. Yes. Also:

  14. Well said, Tom S.

    I respect TexasDude's police experience. But, I also see your point about his health issues. These police/citizen encounters aren't always black and white, no pun intended. As a civilian, it did look bad that his knee was on his neck for eight minutes. But, as you said, I wasn't there.

    As Mr. Wauck said, the man was no saint.

    I watched the Lone Ranger as a boy and some episodes would feature a lynch mob. I often think of those episodes when we have another one of these situations.

    The Milwaukee police chief had an excellent retort when asked why he was looking at his cellphone when he was talking to a crowd. In an emotional retort he said that he was checking on the health of a five year-old black girl who had been shot in the head. She died.

    He said that 80% of the shootings in Milwaukee over the last five years (I think that's the time frame) were of blacks. During that same time, three black men were killed by the police. He said I bet you know the names of all those men. He said I bet you don't know the names of any of those other victims.

    1. My points are simply this, to put a fine point on it:

      1. Chauvin stands convicted of murder. Tried and convicted before arrest, much less coming near a courtroom. His malice, or lack there of, incompetence, lack of training, poor leadership, etc. are, at this point, irrelevant to the outcome. The lynch mob has spoken and "leadership" has acquiesced.

      2. It was only a matter of time before someone realized what a handy political tool social media is in creating/guiding over the horizon rage mobs. Rage adrenalin is so addictive and so corrosive to societal cohesion, aka "civility", that it makes heroin look absolutely benign.

      3. What we're seeing now is hardly a preface for what's coming.

      Upon rereading #2 above I am put in mind of the movie "28 Days Later" (2002). A quasi zombie movie about a disease that is highly contagious and causes those infected to fall into such an extreme rage that they can't help but try to tear to pieces any uninfected human they encounter, thus destroying civilization. When I first saw it I thought the premise dumb, like most zombie drivel, but after the events of the last week I may have to rethink that. This rage is indeed epidemic, just as extremely irrational/destructive, and has a clear vector in social media; it resembles a disease much more than a movement. Once again life imitates art.
      Tom S.

  15. I seriously doubt Chauvin and the other three officers woke up that day, put on the uniform, and told themselves they were going to kill a black man or anyone that day. That kind of officer is normally weeded out long before 19 years in the job even under civil service.

    I also have no doubt that Floyd’s intoxication was such that made him hard to subdue, even with handcuffs on.

    As on officer, you are judged on what is reasonable, that is what it would be reasonable for another officer to do. This is why many times officers are cleared in deadly use of force situations because the action itself was what a reasonable officer would do in the same situation.

    I do not see how this was reasonable in any way, with training or lack of training. I have had handcuffed subject kick at me, spit on me, try to bite me, try to and actually damage the back of the police car during transport. I have had a subject that was handcuffed, belted into the back of a police car banging his head on any surface causing injuries to his head and leaving the rear seat, door window, and part of the separation covered in blood.

    I did not kneel in the neck.

    I have had someone try to elbow me in the face while I was trying to arrest. This subject is was taken to the ground and handcuffed while he struggled.

    Still no knee to the neck.

    I was in a pursuit of a shooting suspect in a highspeed freeway that went into another city. Felony traffic stop, guns drawn.

    Again, no knee to neck.

    Giving pain compliance techniques to a suspect’s shin while in the roof of a house. Etc, etc, etc

    Put it to you this way ... I had long dealings with a black career criminal and his family. Arrests, foot chases, etc. One day it was reported that he was trying to hang himself. I arrived, he had a rope around his neck that was attached to a tree branch. No matter my past dealings with him, I position myself under him, placing my hands on his legs in case he jumped. I was calmly telling him this is not the way. I convinced him to climb down. We then got him the mental help he needed. This guy, who had been in the state penitentiary, of which some of his time was due to my actions, thanked me and told me that holding his legs helped him.

    I feel tremendous sadness for all involved.

    - TexasDude

    1. Good for you. By your own lengthy account you're an exemplary person.

      Here's my problem:

      "I also have no doubt that Floyd’s intoxication was such that made him hard to subdue, even with handcuffs on."

      You tend to avoid the significant possibility that the use of fentanyl and meth may not only have made him difficult to subdue but also may have been a major factor in Floyd's death.

      It's arguable that Chauvin should have had that possibility in mind in dealing with Floyd. Nevertheless, Chauvin can't be held accountable for lack of medical knowledge re the effects a specific and authorized technique would have on a person who was under the influence of multiple drugs that are not fully understood by the medical profession.

    2. Not avoiding it at all.

      Take out the drugs, but same situation ...

      Still not reasonable.

      - TexasDude

    3. I am a normal cop, not great, not bad.

      Condescension was unwarranted.

      - TexasDude

    4. I saw no condescension. When someone sets himself up as an exemplary person by telling personal anecdotes from his past, it is highly likely that he will be considered to be an exemplary person. Wasn’t that his point in telling the anecdotes about how he handled diffiult situations? We can’t have it both ways. If I tell stories about how well I did something and someone else says “well done”, do I automatically determine that they are being condescending?

      None of us - even former cops - knows all of what was happening there that day. Those who believe they saw all they needed to see when they viewed the video are sadly mistaken. There is always more. Those who are trying to set up bad blood between Chauvin and Floyd are working from pure conjecture. Making up a story. That is a common occurrence when underinformed persons are looking for reasons why something happened.

      But I agree that those four cops did not get up that morning and head out to kill a black man. Or any other man.

  16. I will make one comment about the rumored facts of the case.

    Much is being made of the apparent fact that Officer Chauvin worked at the same "dance" venue as Mr. Floyd and must have known him and perhaps carried some animosity from that relationship. Officer Chauvin worked as security and Mr. Floyd as a bouncer. I'm sure Mr. Floyd sometimes had to suppress his "gentle giant" persona when correcting patron behavior. Possibly Officer Chauvin had witnessed one or more of those very rare occasions, had an experiential understanding of what Mr. Floyd was physically capable of, and chose a better-safe-than-sorry approach to restraint, however less than optimal the particular method might have been.

    Just saying that this fact could fit a defense as easily as a prosecution.

  17. "Sen. Amy Klobuchar Announces Additional Charges Coming in George Floyd Case"

    Wh... What? Senator announces...??? WTH is going on in this country?!

    1. Trying to elbow her way back into the VP Sweepstakes.
      Tom S.

    2. A politician doing what politicians do. I watched her yesterday in the RR hearing. She cannot hide her arrogance. Simply oozes it. An incredibly unattractive person who got nowhere running for president. For good reason.

    3. It's not a matter of a "politician doing what politicians do." Members of Congress don't announce criminal charges. In fact, neither she nor any politician should have any advance or inside knowledge regarding the filing of criminal charges against anybody. It's highly inappropriate.

    4. True, and of course thinking beings have learned not to turn to Dem politicos for appropriate behavior in these situations. Now how'd you like her in the Oval Office? I can't fathom anyone taking that risk.

    5. Klobuchar has never gotten over having been a prosecutor. Throughout the impeachment, any time she had the mic, she reminded everyone of that… I wouldn’t want her anywhere near the Oval Office. Nor next door, or even in my neighborhood.

  18. Note, I am anonymous, posting on this site under a nom de plume. Any and all I state here should be taken with that in light.

    That said, I feel I have established over time a decent amount of reputation to at least to be heard and, hopefully, taken as credible.

    Mark has made a great point in regards to murder.

    It’s a point that I have truly danced around, not the drug stuff.

    The main problem I have with the officers’ actions is based on my own experience and views. I have put knees and feet on suspect’s backs. I have never put a knee on a neck, though.

    By training, I, and my department, have had training and authorization in neck restraints. I have never done one as a police officer. I have never felt that any of my incidences required one, either by circumstances or by design.

    Thing is, training is ... well ... not consistent.

    During the 1990s, I trained and then instructed in Shin Toshi Karate. I employed neck restraints in the dojo in fights. I had them done to me. All with tap outs to say, I am done. I have been knocked out and even knocked out standing.

    Thus, when I went into law enforcement, I had a good understanding of the perils of fighting. Granted, I went in older and I think wiser. My prior career was a software developer during the era.

    My use of force incidences are rare. I can sell an arrest to the point the arrestee is thanking me in the jail. To this point, though, I purposely, at times, will forsake personal safety to meet my objective ... no fights to effect arrest. Is that wise? Maybe not, but it has served me well for over 16 years.

    I fully believe, to my core, that even the most evil, vile person has humanity and demands we treat him as human no matter what he subjects me to.

    Over a thousand arrests later with only a handful of use of force reports seems to justify my approach.

    I am not the cop to immediately pull you over for a traffic violation and issue a ticket. Compliance is the goal, not money to the municipality or state. If i can and I feel arrest is not warranted on something higher, I will not or do my best not to. Sometimes, though, I am overrule by state law or department policy.

    From what I have seen via various video accounts of the Floyd incident, I cannot just say it was justified or allow for mitigating factors such as suspect intoxication.

    At the very least, these officers refused to give Floyd the basic courtesy of being a human. At the most, the murdered him. What can actually be proven in a court is another thing.

    What I feel the most saddened about is that no one there took the “tactical pause” to asses the situation and to divert from the path taken.

    A life lost, careers lost, and freedom lost due to 1 maybe 2 misdemeanors.

    - TexasDude

    1. Look, I don't actually disagree with anything you're saying, but do you have to say it at such length? The knee to neck was something that I'd never seen before, and other aspects of the custody were not in line with my own training. After researching more I've concluded that it was stupid and possibly to one degree or another a punishment for resistance. I still have questions about the cause of death, however.

    2. Sorry, I felt I had to. Mea culpa. I like the discourse here.

      - TexasDude

    3. For my part, I apologize for overreacting. I felt that you seemed to feel you needed to justify yourself, and I don't think anyone here--least of all myself--feels that way. I agree with Joe that it's doubtful Chauvin intended the result, and I'm on board with you that what he did shouldn't have been done--whether or not the department regs can be read to say it was authorized. I got wrapped up in the technical details.

  19. I see that the charges in MN were upgraded from 3rd degree murder to 2nd degree.

    Chauvin knew that he was on camera and there were witnesses present. Would he have the state of mind to kill a man knowing there are witnesses? Whether he is or isn't responsible for Floyd's death, I find it difficult to believe that he intended it.

  20. As to your apologies to each other, I suspect that you both may be going through what I am going through. Intense anger, some fear, concern for our future, etc.

    For me, at least, these are really tough times. People of good will can agree that the death of George Floyd is tragic and perceive the same event differently.

    Mr. Wauck said it well, we watched the video and we're all eyewitnesses. Except that we are not. We only saw what the video showed and the audio.

    I don't want to rehash it and say too much more tonight; we discussed it enough for today. I want to say that we have a process in the country. We support the rule of law. Emotions are raw and that's why we have the courts, constitutional protections, etc.

    Back to my emotions. They are raw, as well, because so much has been coming out and I am excited, but also angry. Angry at the denying Dems, lying Fake News and deceptive Deep State.

    We've come off two months of the Wuhan virus, job layoffs, the RR testimony.

    Thankfully, here at this blog, we treat each other with respect!


    1. Joe, at various times in their lives people become frazzled - for a myriad of reasons. One of the blessings of being “seasoned”, as my son calls it, is that we don’t fall apart or believe things are hopeless when it is just another bad cycle, one of many that came before and will come again. It is important to try to gain some perspective. In life, the only way out is through. We can face the life we are dealt with some resilience, or we can let it batter us around and make us feel weak and troubled. The choice is ours.

    2. The latest on Floyd was that the final autopsy disclosed that, his having tested positive for COVID-19 on April 3, the post mortem test administered by the medical examiner showed him to still be positive. Supposedly asymptomatic.

    3. Yes, I noticed that, too. Now here's a tweet from shipwreckedcrew, a former Fed prosecutor:

      Minn. AG Keith Ellison is preparing for show trials of the 4 MPD officers by charging 2nd deg Murder. Its a PR stunt because it requires proof of intent to kill.
      People who know what they are doing will make him understand he's setting up a losing hand.
      1:43 PM · Jun 3, 2020

      There's actually a bit more to it. My understanding is that in MN, 2nd degree murder is a situation in which someone is killed while the perp is committing another felony. Obviously, that doesn't fit. And 3rd degree doesn't fit, either. All of these definitions have been litigated to MN Supreme Court.

      That's not an argument that nothing wrong was done, but that to one extent or another both the cops and non-cops are poorly served by the liberal system in MN. It's an all round poor model for the rest of the country.

      Don Surber argues that Ellison is cynically pushing 2nd degree knowing that it won't lead to a conviction but to more outrage.

    4. Sorry if I've made any mistakes on degrees of murder, but the bottom line is that none appear to fit the situation.

    5. I think you're right regarding fueling outrage. I guess that means this case will be on a fast track for maximum election impact.

  21. I totally agree about the comments about Ellison and 2nd degree murder. In my opinion, this is all about roiling the country and hurting the President's reelection chances.

  22. I believe most of us see that as the real root cause behind these obviously choreographed “responses”, especially when they occur during an election year like this one where it appears the Dems have really messed up. This late in the game, no really viable candidate, and no one interesting for VP (which is essentially their presidential candidate this time). They have to be desperate. This is just another tactic.

    I’m waiting for someone to disclose that Chauvin and some, if not all, of those cops voted Democrat.