George Floyd dies after police knelt on his neck [Part 2] (MOD NOTE IN POST #1)

Protesters keep racking up wins though

https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/1277380763596570626?s=20

"A Hennepin County judge set a tentative trial date of March 8 for the four men. Separately, one of the former officers, J. Alexander Kueng, filed a document stating he intended to plead not guilty, claiming self-defense and saying that his use of force was reasonable and authorized. None of the other former officers have entered a plea."

"Judge Peter Cahill admonished prosecutors to do their best to keep down pretrial publicity, saying it could affect the defendants’ chances at getting a fair trial and make it more likely that a change of venue would be granted."

"The court battles are likely to pit Mr. Chauvin against the three other former officers, whom attorneys are likely to paint as unwitting participants in a brutal slaying by a veteran police officer, according to public statements made by their lawyers."

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-other-police-officers-charged-in-george-floyds-killing-11593439962

MeMen2_MoRi_ wrote: »

"A Hennepin County judge set a tentative trial date of March 8 for the four men. Separately, one of the former officers, J. Alexander Kueng, filed a document stating he intended to plead not guilty, claiming self-defense and saying that his use of force was reasonable and authorized. None of the other former officers have entered a plea."

"Judge Peter Cahill admonished prosecutors to do their best to keep down pretrial publicity, saying it could affect the defendants’ chances at getting a fair trial and make it more likely that a change of venue would be granted."

"The court battles are likely to pit Mr. Chauvin against the three other former officers, whom attorneys are likely to paint as unwitting participants in a brutal slaying by a veteran police officer, according to public statements made by their lawyers."

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-other-police-officers-charged-in-george-floyds-killing-11593439962

A bit more info To expand on kueng's defense..

"Rule 9 disclosures are required under the Minnesota Rules of Criminal Procedure. Among the defenses that could be presented at trial under Rule 9.02(1)(5) are self defense, entrapment, mental illness or cognitive impairment, duress, alibi, double jeopardy, an expiration of the statute of limitations, collateral estoppel, certain statutory defensive postures where prosecutors alleged multiple counts related to the same crime, and intoxication."

"The first defense Kueng says he will employ at trial is self defense. Under Minnesota common law, the defendant has the burden of proving the core self-defense claim; then, “the state has the burden of disproving one or more of these elements beyond a reasonable doubt”:"

(1) the absence of aggression or provocation on the part of the defendant;

(2) the defendant’s actual and honest belief that he or she was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm;

(3) the existence of reasonable grounds for that belief; and

(4) the absence of a reasonable possibility of retreat to avoid the danger.

"The second defense Kueng plans to use is reasonable use of force. In so noting, Kueng’s attorney cited a statute which says deadly force is “justified only when necessary” in the following situations:"

(1) to protect the peace officer or another from apparent death or great bodily harm;

(2) to effect the arrest or capture, or prevent the escape, of a person whom the peace officer knows or has reasonable grounds to believe has committed or attempted to commit a felony involving the use or threatened use of deadly force; or

(3) to effect the arrest or capture, or prevent the escape, of a person whom the officer knows or has reasonable grounds to believe has committed or attempted to commit a felony if the officer reasonably believes that the person will cause death or great bodily harm if the person’s apprehension is delayed.

"The third defense Kueng will use, according to the documents, is authorized use of force by a police officer. Under Minnesota law, “reasonable force may be used upon or toward the person of another without the other’s consent” under certain circumstances, which relevantly include when a police officer is “effecting a lawful arrest” or “executing any other duty imposed upon the public officer by law,” or “when used by any person in resisting or aiding another to resist an offense against the person,” or “when used by any person to prevent the escape, or to retake following the escape, of a person lawfully held on a charge or conviction of a crime.”

https://lawandcrime.com/george-floyd-death/ex-minneapolis-cop-charged-in-george-floyd-death-plans-to-argue-self-defense-reasonable-use-of-force-at-trial-documents/

Justin Credible Darts wrote: »

As I said weeks ago we have scummy entitled white scum doing all this nonsense in the name of black lives matter, when most black people have even spoke out against what is done in their name.

Do you have a link to back that claim up by chance?

Last I saw, 86% of black people, 77% of Hispanics, 75% of Asians and 60% of white people supported the protests: https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2020/06/12/amid-protests-majorities-across-racial-and-ethnic-groups-express-support-for-the-black-lives-matter-movement/

Justin Credible Darts wrote: »

in the previous thread...part 1 there were a few videos posted of black people speaking out what is being done in their name.


Are you telling me black people are in favour of the violence in their name then ?????

You said most black people, do you have 22 million or so of those videos, or some kind of polling or survey to back that statement up?

That is why I showed you that 86% of black people support the protests. A majority of all races do. It's why large corporations are getting behind it. It's why sports leagues are doing sharp u turns on matters relating to protests. It's why the confederate flag is being removed from state flags and banned from sporting events, and it's why states are electing to take down statues as a result of them. Because the protests are popular, not just with black people but with the majority of all races, and because they are winning.

And though some really, really seem to wish it would - the fact is that a few random videos of people tearing down posters doesn't change that.

xtal191 wrote: »

Can I ask what drew you to alt right, wife battering goon Avi Yemini?

Biafranlivemat wrote: »

That’s what people might say in an opinion poll. But the reality is, the protesters on the streets are mostly White.

Seems quite a mish mash to be honest, plenty of black, white, Hispanic and Asian people out there. After all, the majority of pretty much every race agrees with these protests and white people make up the majority of Americans while only 1 in 8 are Black, so plenty of non black people being there shouldn't be surprising.

White people being in attendance at these protests doesn't mean black people are not allowed approve of these same protests, by the way.

Justin Credible Darts wrote: »

again you are trying to spin the initial post in to a debate on protests.

I stated clearly most black people are against violence committed in their name. Nowhere in my initial post did I mention protests.

You have yet to show anything beyond a random video or two of what you claim to be over 23mn black people. Some polling or survey evidence, or really anything beyond 1 or 2 videos on youtube will help.