Current Riots in America (June 2020)

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Peter,

Scott Adams says this trial is not about the facts. In his eyes, the facts have more than established reasonable doubt.

Instead, it's is about putting a man on trial for being a white cop.

Not white per se. Not a cop per se.

A white cop.

It's in this video.

The main reason any juror will vote to convict is to protect their family from the mob or to try to alleviate the rioting.

Reminds me of courts of old during the days of the Ku Klux Klan, but with colors inverted...

Michael

[tmj]

That calling out for his mother thing is widely reported , I'm not sure of its significance, and I think when his girlfriend was asked in court what nicknames they had for each other she stated it was true that Floyd called her mama.

If I were on the jury , I'd be privy to all the evidence provided in the courtroom and the instructions from the court re charging. Without those , all I have to go on is what is reported and I honestly haven't paid that much attention. But from what I've gleaned it isn't a clear cut case ( things rarely are) but nothing I've seen justifies identifying the events of that day as a white cop out to kill any black man he could, so definitely not in the homicide committed by a racist camp. The reactions to this case and ones similar are exasperated by media pushed race baiting and the cultural acquiescence to the notion of 'hate crimes'.  

[Brant Gaede]

On 4/6/2021 at 9:37 AM, Ellen Stuttle said:

“Cities Will Be on Fire” – Black Lives Matter Activist Warns “All Hell Will Break Loose” If Officer Chauvin Is Not Convicted in George Floyd Death

Ellen

Calling for a lynching.

--Brant

[Peter]

Chauvin when he was off duty moonlighted as a club bouncer. Who also worked at that club at the same time as a bouncer: George Floyd. Some early stories said they did not like working together.  

[Peter]

On Fox a Congresswoman from California wanted to discuss if there should be “shoot to kill rules for police,” considering the effectiveness of modern firearms and training? That’s a tough question but plausibly a “yes vote” is attainable, just as body cameras for police are now standard policy. But if someone had a knife lunging at you, would you want the officer on the scene to shoot at the perpetrator’s leg?

From Metro in Ohio: Police responded with the familiar refrain: We don't shoot to maim. If there is a threat that requires lethal force, we shoot to kill. But where did that policy come from? In this age of sophisticated weaponry and training techniques, can officers be trained to shoot suspects in a less deadly way? Some officers are able to do this. Just six days after Tamir was killed, a seven-year veteran police officer in Akron shot a man in the leg who was holding knives to a woman's throat . . . Police officers who come face-to-face with armed and dangerous suspects are trained to "shoot to kill," but experts say that phrase doesn't account for the complexities of an officer-involved shooting . . . . Asked whether police officer training historically teaches a "shoot to kill" philosophy, veteran officers overwhelmingly answered "yes," but said death isn't necessarily the end goal. "Killing isn't the objective," said Geoffrey Alpert, professor at University of South Carolina who researches high-risk police activity. "The objective is to remove the threat." The most effective way to do that is to shoot at a person's torso because it's the largest part of the body – and where a shot is most likely to incapacitate someone who poses a potential threat, Joseph Morbitzer, president of the Ohio Association of Chiefs of Police said. Officers train during target practice by firing at paper targets shaped like people where the bullseye is the chest near the sternum, according to Thomas Aveni, executive director at the Police Policy Studies Council.

[tmj]

Fox and that congressman really honed in on the issue: police marksmanship. Why don't they take full advantage of all the new gun technology, good points.

[Peter]

Lieutenant! Phasers on stun.

[Peter]

To reiterate, Derek Chauvin knew he was being filmed as he continued to press his knee on Floyd. He did what he did for anyone to see. He has been convicted and he will be sentenced very soon, on June 25, 2021. What should his sentence be? Timed served and parole? One year OR the maximum thirty years which would be in solitary confinement? To me, he is guilty as charged and convicted but I am not sure what his sentence should be. Peter  

From USA TODAY: Derek Chauvin, the former Minneapolis police officer convicted of murdering George Floyd with a knee pressed to his neck, should receive no prison time or far less than the maximum sentence in part because he is the product of a "broken system," his defense attorney wrote in a court filing Wednesday. Prosecutors argued in a brief filed Wednesday that Chauvin's "actions traumatized Mr. Floyd’s family, the bystanders who watched Mr. Floyd die, and the community. And his conduct shocked the Nation’s conscience."

Chauvin, 45, was convicted of second- and third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter in Floyd's death in May 2020, which spurred mass protests and a national reckoning around systemic racism and police brutality. Chauvin is set to be sentenced June 25.He faces a maximum sentence of 30 years in prison because the judge overseeing the case concluded he abused his position of trust and authority, among other aggravating factors. Chauvin has been in prison awaiting sentencing since April 21 and would get credit for time served. Eric Nelson, his attorney, wrote in the filing that Chauvin is in solitary confinement in a high-security prison because he is likely to be targeted by other prisoners.

Three other officers involved in the incident face charges of aiding and abetting Floyd's murder. They are scheduled to be tried in 2022. All four officers have been charged in federal court with violating Floyd's civil rights during the arrest. Chauvin made his first appearance in that case Tuesday. Meanwhile, the Justice Department is investigating the Minneapolis Police Department for a systemic violations of people's civil rights.

[ThatGuy]

Meanwhile, back in Portland: Antifa tries to kill Andy Ngo AGAIN:
 

 

[turkeyfoot]

The f'g injustice of it all. Derek Chauvin found guilty of 2nd degree murder and sentenced to 22 1/2 yrs. He's 45 yrs old. Consider the bigger picture for those who want something to burn. The police procedures for restraining criminals who resist. Oh no, that would be an indictment of training methods. Its clear proper methods were used.  

https://www.theepochtimes.com/derek-chauvin-sentenced-to-over-years-in-prison-over-george-floyds-death_3874596.html

[turkeyfoot]

On 4/20/2021 at 1:34 AM, Peter said:

Chauvin when he was off duty moonlighted as a club bouncer. Who also worked at that club at the same time as a bouncer: George Floyd. Some early stories said they did not like working together.  

I know if you want you can obtain less prejudicial information than that. Try harder. 

[turkeyfoot]

On 6/2/2021 at 11:56 PM, Peter said:

To reiterate, Derek Chauvin knew he was being filmed as he continued to press his knee on Floyd. He did what he did for anyone to see. He has been convicted and he will be sentenced very soon, on June 25, 2021. What should his sentence be? Timed served and parole? One year OR the maximum thirty years which would be in solitary confinement? To me, he is guilty as charged and convicted but I am not sure what his sentence should be. Peter  

From USA TODAY: Derek Chauvin, the former Minneapolis police officer convicted of murdering George Floyd with a knee pressed to his neck, should receive no prison time or far less than the maximum sentence in part because he is the product of a "broken system," his defense attorney wrote in a court filing Wednesday. Prosecutors argued in a brief filed Wednesday that Chauvin's "actions traumatized Mr. Floyd’s family, the bystanders who watched Mr. Floyd die, and the community. And his conduct shocked the Nation’s conscience."

Chauvin, 45, was convicted of second- and third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter in Floyd's death in May 2020, which spurred mass protests and a national reckoning around systemic racism and police brutality. Chauvin is set to be sentenced June 25.He faces a maximum sentence of 30 years in prison because the judge overseeing the case concluded he abused his position of trust and authority, among other aggravating factors. Chauvin has been in prison awaiting sentencing since April 21 and would get credit for time served. Eric Nelson, his attorney, wrote in the filing that Chauvin is in solitary confinement in a high-security prison because he is likely to be targeted by other prisoners.

Three other officers involved in the incident face charges of aiding and abetting Floyd's murder. They are scheduled to be tried in 2022. All four officers have been charged in federal court with violating Floyd's civil rights during the arrest. Chauvin made his first appearance in that case Tuesday. Meanwhile, the Justice Department is investigating the Minneapolis Police Department for a systemic violations of people's civil rights.

Floy died of a heart condition and Fentanyl. He also tested positive for Covid. Someone with the vaguest knowledge of SARS-2 will tell you breathing is compromised. But that simply scratches the surface. The resistance he offered was met with a training manual hold. The mere fact that he died isn't nearly enough to connect a charge of murder. I don't know where you get your news from but its clear there's not depth to it. 

 

[caroljane]

1 hour ago, turkeyfoot said:

Floy died of a heart condition and Fentanyl. He also tested positive for Covid. Someone with the vaguest knowledge of SARS-2 will tell you breathing is compromised. But that simply scratches the surface. The resistance he offered was met with a training manual hold. The mere fact that he died isn't nearly enough to connect a charge of murder. I don't know where you get your news from but its clear there's not depth to it. 

 

Where did you get your pathologist's credentials? And your telepathic powers? The whole trial was broadcast live.

I suppose the Twin Towers just fell down of their own accord, too.

[Peter]

1 hour ago, caroljane said:

Where did you get your pathologist's credentials? And your telepathic powers? The whole trial was broadcast live.

I suppose the Twin Towers just fell down of their own accord, too.

I agree with caroljane. He knew he was being filmed as he deliberately killed George Floyd . . . and he didn't care. Overwhelming hatred was evident on Chauvin's part. You can see his foot rise off the ground as he is pressing Floyd's body down. He is warned by his peers. He continues to press after Floyd has stopped struggling and breathing.

And now, the argument from intimidation or is it just reason and experience? This is old news but before I went into the Army I was in charge of the Ocean City, Maryland Sub Station jail, guarding women and juveniles. I don't remember any training that taught us to deliberately restrain a violent person until they were dead.  

edit. Here is another period story. When I was with the OCPD my brother was too and he walked a beat just west of the boardwalk. I went into the Army during the Vietnam War, and my brother went into the Army just after me. Unless I was in the field I had a desk job in South Korea. My brother was at Fort Carson, Colorado if I remember correctly, and he was a supply sergeant. Talk about luck.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

17 hours ago, turkeyfoot said:

The f'g injustice of it all. Derek Chauvin found guilty of 2nd degree murder and sentenced to 22 1/2 yrs. He's 45 yrs old. Consider the bigger picture for those who want something to burn. The police procedures for restraining criminals who resist. Oh no, that would be an indictment of training methods. Its clear proper methods were used.  

https://www.theepochtimes.com/derek-chauvin-sentenced-to-over-years-in-prison-over-george-floyds-death_3874596.html

TF,

I think this will be overturned on appeal.

The case was full of holes an appeals court can latch onto, starting with venue. 

Once overturned, double jeopardy kicks in. I doubt the prosecutors will take this one to the Supreme Court.

That's how I predict the legal aspect will happen. I might be wrong, but that's what it looks like to me.

 

There is something worse, though. Chauvin's life will be a nightmare so long as the mainstream press and the woke members of the oligarchy insist on prosecuting him in the sphere of public opinion. Once he returns to being a free man, imagine him trying to work at anything other than menial jobs. 

He needs to get a different narrative out there in the public. As you can see, facts and laws have no bearing on what the public wants and that even spills over into the courts. All the public has fundamentally is the image that the mainstream media blasted out 24/7 without any objectivity. 

That image became the full reality in most people's minds. And they are immune to seeing it any other way irrespective of what is revealed (being that suspending the main narrative lens is what objectivity demands).

I doubt Chauvin is the kind of man to craft and deploy an effective narrative to counter that. He might get some Hollywood people to work on it, but if I know Hollywood people, they will trick him for the rights and turn him into a worse monster than the public image in the mainstream narrative.

 

I know the following isn't going to be a popular opinion, but I think this entire event did not have good or evil in it. I think it happened due to George Floyd being a dumbass, Derek Chauvin not knowing how to pose for the cameras and being a little too zoned out, and an unfortunate delay in the arrival of the medical unit. 

I speak as someone who used to be a dumbass like Floyd was. I certainly would not want that part of my life to be my main legacy. 

The way this is being propagandized is where the good and evil is found. When I think about the fact that the assholes are elevating dumbass George Floyd to the stature of Rosa Parks, I want to spit.

What they are doing, enshrining a lowlife as a saint with statues and everything, is evil. In addition to a whole slew of objections, I see the assholes cheapening the lives of Rosa Parks and all those who legitimately stood up against Jim Crow. This is 1984-land.

Imagine a black child looking up at a George Floyd statue and thinking, "I want to be just like he was."

Bah...

Michael

[ThatGuy]

1 hour ago, Peter said:

And now, the argument from intimidation or is it just reason and experience? This is old news but before I went into the Army I was in charge of the Ocean City, Maryland Sub Station jail, guarding women and juveniles. I don't remember any training that taught us to deliberately restrain a violent person until they were dead.  

"AKSHUALLY..." That would technically be "argument from authority", not "intimidation", but with THAT said, it's a fair question to counter that accusation with an appeal to reason and experience, in this case (as presented), so, not really an argument from authority, either...

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

7 minutes ago, ThatGuy said:

"AKSHUALLY..." That would technically be "argument from authority", not "intimidation"...

TG,

Premise checking time.

Argument from Intimidation

Even though the particulars Rand talked about for Argument from Intimidation are in a more formal discussion or learning environment than in the media, the fear of being blamed morally unworthy is the same. The poison is in the moral realm, not the information realm.

Michael

[ThatGuy]

1 hour ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

TG,

Premise checking time.

Argument from Intimidation

Michael

I didn't read Peter's post as "intimidation", but I could see how it would be an appeal to "authority", even if I personally thought it was a genuine attempt to apply relevant personal experience.

But maybe I'm missing the larger context.

[Edit: I went to the lexicon to look up "argument from authority", but didn't find it. Not even sure if it's a concept she directly named, now; maybe it's subsumed under "argument from intimidation?" I dunno where I heard it, now...but whatever the correct term, I didn't think Peter (this time) was engaging in either...]

 

[william.scherk]

3 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

3 hours ago, ThatGuy said:

AKSHUALLY..." That would technically be "argument from authority", not "intimidation"...

Premise checking time.

Argument from Intimidation

The Ayn Rand Lexicon entry on "Argument from Intimidation" is chopped up for -- I suppose -- more efficient thinking about the quotes. 

There are a few places which dare commit piracy to provide full text of the essay article. Here is one:
Ayn Rand: The Virtue of Selfishness. 19. The Argument from intimidation. (andrsib.com)

I've always wondered why Rand did not in this essay cite more 'ackchewal' statements and arguments as exemplars, why she supplied what seemed like Just-So snippets or Quoats.

"[T]he sick and disgusting, gaslighting, mentally ill narcissist pig"

"[Y]ou are a lying, deranged, leftist scumbag"

“Only those who are evil (dishonest, heartless, insensitive, ignorant, etc.) can hold such an idea.”

Haters!

On the other hand, if I cannot ascribe a compleat moral evul to a particular actor or collectivity -- and thus dodge protracted encounters with ackchewal arguments -- what adventures in pysychologizing would I miss? How much fun with insults could be had in the absence of George H Smith?

I'd probably fall down a rathole called "Normative Cognition" ...

Edited June 26, 2021 by william.scherk
Added third just-so example; tried to fix font issue -- editing box lacks font-color. Will fix ASAP

[william.scherk]

duplicate

Edited June 27, 2021 by william.scherk
Please delete, Maestro

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

William,

Argument from Intimidation is one of the reasons someone is no longer here, but you are. What's even weirder is that, instead of just leaving, he intimidated himself off the reservation.

On the other hand, if the standard involved readability of posts, I fear you would not score very high up on the totem pole.

I think there's a point to what you just posted, but damned if I know what it is.

In other words, what the fuck are you doing?

Michael

[turkeyfoot]

22 hours ago, caroljane said:

Where did you get your pathologist's credentials? And your telepathic powers? The whole trial was broadcast live.

I suppose the Twin Towers just fell down of their own accord, too.

'Mam, you have the internet and appear interested. If its evidence you want.

You made an interesting connection. It may not be apparent.

In a similar fashion the root cause for terrorism that made its way past our FBI guardians, those entrusted to insure justice (principle for right action) would stay intact; took a few days off (HA). Yet the consequential (willingly) blind (prosecution) leading the blind (jurors) led toward, I say, the same "fate".

That is the act of bedrock principles failing. Both situations missed their aim by long shots.

Did you read the autopsy report?

"Signed by Dr. Andrew M. Baker, it says Floyd had tested positive for the novel coronavirus on April 3. A post-mortem nasal swab confirmed that diagnosis. 

In addition to fentanyl and methamphetamine, the toxicology report from the autopsy showed that Floyd also had cannabinoids in his system when he died.

Floyd also had heart disease, hypertension and sickle cell trait..."

What I find strange is so commonly understood about SARS-CoV-2 yet is conspicuously missing. These findings should at least have mitigated a murder charge into probation given the officer was carrying out MPD training protocol.

[Peter]

I suggest everyone interested, "watch the video," including the later shown different angles of observation. If you had been George Floyd watching that from Valhalla, would you say Chauvin was dazed, awestruck, or totally and knowingly, committing murder? I say it was cold blooded murder. Not premeditated but in the sense of, if I ever have YOU in my hands I am going to kill you effing N$^&*(#@ exclamation point.     

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

9 hours ago, Peter said:

I say it was cold blooded murder. Not premeditated but in the sense of, if I ever have YOU in my hands I am going to kill you effing N$^&*(#@ exclamation point.     

Peter,

I grew up and lived around people who felt that way.

I didn't see anything in Chauvin's behavior that corresponds to the behavior of what I have observed. And that includes later movies, TV show, books, etc., that depicted white racists (which, for the most part, were caricatures of racists in the same manner Minstrel Shows used to present caricatures of blacks).

Where you see a sadistic cold blooded racist murderer (like a racist version of Snidely Whiplash), I see the police equivalent of a bureaucrat going about his job according to the rules and waiting for quitting time to arrive (Dilbert's Pointy-haired Boss, and even that's a stretch from where I sit but there's some truth in it).

We see what we see, I guess...

 

Apropos, do you see George Floyd as a dumbass or as a victimized African male nobly suffering white racist oppression and standing up to it like Rosa Parks did?

 

 

Scott Adams had an interesting question. He asked, what would the situation be if it played out exactly like it did, but Chauvin were black and Floyd were white? Would there be all this hatred slung around? Would a black Chauvin be called a cold-blooded murderer and get 22.5 years? Would a statue be build of a white George Floyd?

Obviously not. And from what I read, both Chauvin and Floyd got along with other races in normal living. That practically proves there was no racism between Chauvin and Floyd to inform the intent of cold-blooded murder.

As to the courts, if justice were truly blind in US courts, normally a cold-blooded murder would be treated the same in either case. But look what's happening. Justice is not blind when the media reaches a certain stage of uproar. 

The people on the jury were scared to death of the public. The were terrified of voting a certain way. That terror informed their judgment. That's not supposed to happen in US courts and it would not have happened if Floyd were white and Chauvin were black.

So the racism is in the media and the race-grifters who inflame racism all the time for their own agendas. Not in the people directly involved in this particular event.

At least this case will be seen in an appeals court in a different venue where intimidation of those examining and ruling over the case will not be the legal standard. 

Michael

[Peter]

My clichéd “effing N$^&*(#@ exclamation point” could have been thought by Chauvin as the deed was being done, much as someone might say, “You dirty rat.” It’s the obvious slur. Early reports said they had crossed paths as co-bouncers at a nightclub and that is where the personal animosity was brewed. I think Chauvin planned nothing but when the opportunity arose he murdered Floyd. The prosecution and the jury agreed. I saw it with my own eyes and I agree with my eyes.