The one officer who's lawyer requested a dismissal of charges asked, but did not insist. Had all three other officers insisted and stopping cooperating with Chauvin, then the position would have been changed.

Or at least, that's the argument I'd suspect would be made. Again, a lot is going to depend on what (if anything) Chauvin is convicted of. If he's found innocent or there's a hung jury, everything could go up in the air. I think a hung jury caused mistrial would probably be the worst possible outcome of the case overall, for all parties involved. If Chauvin's Lawyer proceeded from there to invoke the 5th Amendment double jeopardy clause, it could force a precedent-setting Supreme Court decision regarding whether double jeopardy applies in a mistrial that reached verdict or not, which until now has been mostly left up to lower court judges' discretion.

You can't reasonably use the excuse that you feel threatened from an unconscious perp.



Why would I do that? I have integrity and high standards.

I'm not using any "excuses" at all. It's up to the prosecution to prove beyond any shadow of a doubt that the defendant is guilty of the charges, and it's literally everyone else's job to presume innocence.

I'm willing to play devil's advocate both directions. On this forum, most of my devil's advocate is going to be on the side of Chauvin, due to the pile-on wanting him to be convicted on all three charges.

That being said, you make a great point. The defense claimed Floyd was non-responsive for 3 minutes and 41 seconds while Chauvin continued to restrain them. One of my very own comments the day of the event after watching the video centered around the fact that he continued to kneel on the neck after Floyd lost consciousness. Chauvin's own Supervisor testified that use of force should have ended with the loss of consciousness. Floyd was cuffed, and unconscious, he was unlikely to be a danger to himself when it came to smashing his head into things.

That, right there, is the most damning evidence in the whole case, and not just against Chauvin, but against all four officers. The other three officers allowed Chauvin to continue applying restraint to the side of the neck even after the suspect went non-responsive. That speaks really strongly towards a Manslaughter 2 charge in their futures if Chauvin is found guilty of either murder 2 or murder 3. Or so I think, though is more than welcome to explain why I'm wrong.

lol no

It's the job of the jury to presume innocence. Nobody else has that obligation.

It wasn't negligent. That position was safer than all alternatives and individuals in excited delirium state often suddenly go into hyperconsciousness which could have even killed bystanders.



People still live there. They need some kind of useful system in place.

I agree that cops can't and don't fix everything. But if there is no alternative system in place, what are you going to do?

This post was edited by EndlessSky on Apr 2 2021 12:49pm

A person is not guilty of a crime until convicted by a jury of their peers. That is their 6th Amendment right. Likewise, the due process clause of their 5th amendment right prevents any action against them without that trial first occurring.

As of this time, Chauvin is neither guilty, nor a criminal. He has been indicted and the question is now up to a jury of his peers and the strength of the prosecution and defense's argument.

Your penchant for assuming guilt when it fits your narrative is nasty, unAmerican, and to be honest, I sincerely hope you never do anything untoward that lands you in court. I'm guessing sentiment against you will be every bit as bloodthirsty as it is against Chauvin.

laying on the ground in cuffs, where was he going to go?

it was according to the MPD training manual.

barrel roll?

What should he have done?