1. The KillerFrogs

George Floyd Protest/Rioting/Looting Thread

Discussion in 'The Pit' started by Paul in uhh, May 30, 2020.

  1. Stolen Confederate monument will become a ‘toilet’ unless ‘White Lies Matter’ demands are met, group vows
    The Jefferson Davis Memorial Chair in Selma, Ala., went missing last month

    A group claiming responsibility for the theft of a Confederate monument in Selma, Ala., laid out ransom terms in emails to local media Monday.

    The price for the relic’s return? Not cash, but a demand that the headquarters of the United Daughters of the Confederacy in Richmond hang a banner quoting a Black radical on Friday, the 156th anniversary of Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee’s surrender at the end of the Civil War.

    The Jefferson Davis Memorial Chair, which was first reported missing from Live Oak Cemetery in Selma last month, is an ornately carved stone chair that was dedicated in 1893 to the Confederate president’s memory and is estimated to be worth $500,000.

    Calling itself “White Lies Matter,” the group sent a message to the Montgomery Advertiser and AL.com that included a proof-of-life type photo of the chair, a ransom note styled to look like it came from the 1800s and a photoshopped image of what its banner might look like hoisted above the UDC headquarters more than 700 miles away.

    “Failure to do so will result in the monument, an ornate stone chair, immediately being turned into a toilet. See enclosed photograph,” the group said in the email to AL.com, with the photoshopped image below.

    White Lies Matter demanded the UDC, which is responsible for many of the nation’s Confederate statues and memorials, hang a banner the group said it had already provided on its headquarters in Richmond The banner reads: “The rulers of this country have always considered their property more important than our lives,” which is a quote by Assata Shakur.

  2. Reminds me of the time we got drunk in high school and “kidnapped” the plastic pink flamingo statues in a friend’s yard one night. Cut out ransom note letters from a Sports Illustrated and included photos of the birds with duct tape over their mouths. God we were idiots. Are still, I suppose, since we still laugh about it.
  3. You've admitted that you couldn't bring yourself to watch the whole video; which I understand. However, in admitting that you're unable to view the totality of the evidence in this case and your propensity to dig as far into the court proceedings as the stories you post dictate, I'm left wondering what other aspects of this case you can't or won't allow yourself to be informed about? The prosecution had a terrible day on cross, again, yet the news seems to only reflect the state's side of the equation (only giving a cursory nod to Nelson's cross examination in an inane effort to appear balanced). Are you watching the proceedings? Have you sought out any of the several legal expert commentaries or various podcasts covering this case? Or have you already made up your mind based on the limited video you've watched?

    This is the problem—and I'm speaking as someone with a lot of experience on a jury for a case like this—in which the public will only hear one side of the case or believe the journalistic wrap-ups. Whereas the jury is sitting there hearing the entire case, seeing every emotion, curious about each sidebar and objection, watching Chauvin carefully, and watching each witness be lifted up on direct and torn down on cross. And if my experience tells me anything it's that at some point in the next day or two most of that jury will have made up their mind, and based on what I've seen it won't be good for the state. If Nelson keeps ripping apart the prosecution's witnesses, like he did today, some of those jurors will start to get angry about this whole debacle and it will only get worse as the defense makes their case.

    What I'm trying to say is that we're either going to see a hung jury or acquittal on all charges. My bet is they'll be hung for a LONG time and the judge will keep sending them back to deliberate in hopes that the deadlock will be broken, but I think two of the jurors are already biased against the defense and will most likely never back down regardless of the evidence.
    Salfrog and Showtime Joe 2.0 like this.
  4. Thank goodness we didn't have social media back then.
  5. You cannot stress this point enough.
  6. This should be a new thread topic but here’s my addition to this line of thought:

    We once rode around in a friend’s single cab pickup around july 4 late at night with the windows down and a bag of bottle rockets and a lighter.

    friend in the middle had the job of lighting the bottle rocket, friend on the passenger side had the duty of placing the lit bottle rocket on the roof of the truck as we drove and top gun music was playing on the radio. The bottle rocket would take off like a sidewinder missile and thankfully exploded harmlessly each time.

    thank god we never got caught and yes, no social media. We were sober at least.
  7. Derek Chauvin used unauthorized neck restraint on George Floyd, training officer testifies

    April 6, 2021 at 6:34 p.m. CDT
    MINNEAPOLIS — An officer who trained Derek Chauvin on techniques he could use to subdue suspects testified Tuesday that the neck restraint he used on George Floydwas not authorized because Floyd was already handcuffed and under control.

    Lt. Johnny Mercil, who oversees the Minneapolis department’s training on use of force and other defensive tactics, said that at the time of Floyd’s death on May 25, officers were permitted to restrain suspects by applying pressure to the side of a person’s neck to gain compliance, but only if they were actively resisting and if other techniques had not worked.

    Prosecutor Steve Schleicher showed Mercil a still taken from bystander video of Chauvin kneeling on Floyd’s neck and asked if Chauvin was performing “a MPD-trained neck restraint.”

    “No, sir,” Mercil replied. He said that “knee-on-the-neck is something that might happen” as officers try to gain control of suspects but said the act should stop when a person is no longer actively resisting. He said a neck restraint was considered “active aggression” under MPD use-of-force policy and that officers had been specifically warned to be careful of the neck because of the danger of rendering someone unconscious.

  8. For high school, I went to an all-boys Catholic prep school in the Detroit area where practical jokes were a way of life.

    Back then, AAA (the Auto Club) had a slogan promoting auto safety: "Bring 'Em Back Alive." And the local AAA office had a huge banner with that slogan hanging across its front windows. One night, one of my older brothers and his buddies stole that banner and then plastered it across the front of a funeral parlor that was owned by the father of a couple of kids who attended our school! But the funeral owner took the gag in stride: he always let my brother's garage band use one of his limos to chauffeur them to their local sock hop gigs in style.

    Being in Michigan, our school wasn't air-conditioned so teachers would open the windows to our classrooms when the weather was warm in late Spring or early Fall. Whenever that happened, we would take up a collection before math class and give it to a midget in our class who would sneak out one of the windows when the teacher was writing a long equation on the blackboard. The midget got to keep the money if the teacher never noticed his absence and, sure enough, the teacher never did!
  9. My take on the case since the beginning is that there are two possible outcomes: guilty or hung jury.

    I can't imagine a Black juror going back to their family, friends, neighbors saying they voted not guilty. Regardless of civic or moral duty, I don't believe it will happen, regardless of what the evidence might show.
  10. This article is a prime example of what I've been talking about. The media is pushing one side of this trial and not giving people the full picture of what is happening in court. This is a dangerous tactic on the part of the media that have obviously already made up their minds as to what the "acceptable" outcome of this trial will be, but they're setting the stage for even greater public unrest because this isn't the reality in the courtroom. The jury is seeing all of the testimony, both the direct and the cross, and have plenty of information on hand at this time to create a reasonable doubt. When the verdict comes back these media outlets will have created a powder keg by misleading the public and the jury will light the match.

    Lt. Mercil on cross by Nelson said Chauvin's knee was on Floyd's back, the hold wasn't a blood choke (as the prosecution claimed), the hold while not specifically taught (WaPo misleads with unauthorized) was in line with the use of force tactics considering the previous tactics taught were to use striking implements such as batons, any choke hold that the prosecution said Chauvin used to possibly kill Floyd would have caused unconsciousness in 10 seconds not 10 minutes, and that he himself had pinned a suspect until EMS arrived. This was the state's witness and Nelson used him to rip apart the prosecution's points. Couple that with the fact that the other state expert medical witness, Officer Nicole MacKenzie, turned into another debacle for the state to the point that Nelson informed the court that he planned on calling her back to testify for the defense, and it was a bad day for the prosecution's case.

    But you won't read any of that in WaPo.
  11. Does anyone seriously think the WaPo will be objective these days? They woke!
    Showtime Joe 2.0 and Bob Sugar like this.
  12. The case will go to appeal. No way it does not.
  13. If it’s a hung jury or a defense win, then there’s no appeal.
    GoFrog Yourself likes this.
  14. LOL they test alarm sirens once a month in MN, the first Wednesday of each month at 1 pm.

  15. Another bad day for the prosecution. When your highly paid "expert" on use-of-force turns into more of a defense witness and gets questioned 65% more by the defense you know it's going to be a bad day. Nelson spent 90 minutes with the state's witness and really did a number. And to top it off, this was his FIRST court case as an "expert" in use-of-force... EVER! That is ridiculous, just like this case is becoming.
  16. So what you’re saying is that businesses in minneapolis and other liberal cities should buy fire insurance and invest in plywood...in the name of justice of course
  17. Expert: Derek Chauvin kept knee on neck for 3 minutes after George Floyd drew last breath

    A medical expert testified Thursday in the Derek Chauvin murder trial that George Floyd died from a lack of oxygen late last spring as the now-fired Minneapolis police officer knelt on the neck and then held that position for three minutes after Floyd drew his last breath.

    Dr. Martin Tobin, a Chicago physician who has specialized in respiratory and critical care medicine for decades, said he has reviewed much of the evidence and concluded that "Floyd died from a low level of oxygen. This caused damage to his brain that we see, and it also caused a [pulseless electrical activity] arrhythmia that caused his heart to stop."

    Cause of death has provided a sharp divide between the state and the defense. The prosecution is saying Floyd died from a lack of oxygen, while defense attorney Eric Nelson has argued that Floyd died of a cardiac arrest and other factors.

    Using "precise science," Tobin said Floyd lapsed into unconsciousness shortly before 8:25 p.m. on May 25 as his oxygen levels plummeted.

    Floyd stopped breathing 23 seconds later and "didn't have an ounce of oxygen in his body" less than a minute after losing consciousness, Tobin said.

    After Floyd's breathing ceased, the doctor said that Chauvin's "knee remained on the neck for another 3 minutes and 2 seconds."

    Unlike many experts called to testify in cases, Tobin said he is not being paid. He said he has testified in dozens of malpractice cases, but this is his first time as a witness in a criminal proceeding. He said the prosecution came to him about testifying, and he agreed because "I thought I might have some knowledge to explain how Mr. Floyd died."

    Using a composite video, Tobin showed jurors how Floyd was positioned with the officers on top of him and how it contributed to his inability to take sufficient breaths. He said Chauvin and officer J. Alexander Kueng manipulated Floyd's handcuffs by "pushing them into his back and pushing them high," which further hindered his ability to breathe.

    "It's like the left side is in a vise, it's being pushed in from the street at the bottom and the way the handcuffs are manipulated … totally interferes with central features of how we breathe," he said.

    Tobin said Floyd also used his left shoulder in attempt to create chest space to draw a breath, but "the shoulder is a very ineffective way of breathing."

    "Basically, on the left side of his chest," Tobin continued, "it's as if a surgeon almost went in and removed the lung ... and left him totally reliant on his right side," the doctor said.

  18. think the civil insurrection clause of those insurance policies might be a road block
  19. Surprise! Another misleading article. The defense isn't ignoring hypoxia as a reason for Floyd's death, they're specifically making the case that it was the leading cause since hypoxia is the PRIMARY reason for death among those that OD on Fentanyl. The state's own medical expert, the man who pronounced Floyd dead at the hospital, testified to that point two days ago. Additionally, the use of force expert for the state admitted that the hold Chauvin used was not a blood choke, Floyd was able to move and breath for several minutes before, what appears to have been an overdose of 3x the legal limit of Fentanyl, he stopped breathing. And as a cherry on top yesterday's use of force expert admitted in court, again this is the state's witness, that Chauvin would have been within his right and the department's use. of force guidelines to have tasered Floyd the minute he arrived on the scene, which the department considers a higher user of force than the hold he eventually used.
  20. I’m very interested in this case, but I’m no lawyer and can’t watch so I’m taking opinions from various places. It seems there’s a about a 4:1 ratio of people who say the state is doing great vs what you are saying. How impartial are you?

Share This Page