Derek Chauvin cost the City of Minneapolis $27 MILLION because he elected to knee in neck a man to death who was NO THREAT TO HIM. Worth it?

I think the higher the award the more embarrassed the police. $27 million is a slamdunk. $5 million is a pacifier. Just my take on it. You're right. Nothing will be bring George Floyd back. But something is better than nothing a bigger something is better than a smaller. In my opinion. I thinK $100 million might have made a better point. Soon maybe $1 BILLION?  Thank you for your reply L :)

Maybe you're right.  I just don't think being killed by a police officer (or anyone else) should automatically make people multi-millionaires.  

What is a stolen life worth L? Is there a limit to the value of potential? What about the people who loved the victim? Are their lives worth anything since they are changed forever? Money cannot repay lost potential or grief or misery. But at least it is tangible PROOF of the terrible wrong done and I say the more the better! Huge payouts should be automatically given. Enormous. Gigantic. Humongous. Just my view. Money will never take away the misery. But it will ease the lives of those left behind and why not do that if possible? So we disagree. No big deal. Thank you for your reply! :)

As always, we can agree to disagree. :)

Certainment mon ami certainment! :) ((hugs))

No, the civil case is over..that is always a check or dismissal.
 
Criminal trial is ongoing.

No. The trial is going on NOW. The murderer's lawyer said knowledge of that $27 million payout from the City of Minneapolis would taint the trial and he wanted it moved to somewhere. How stupid is he? THE WHOLE WORLD HAS SEEN THE OVER 9 MINUTE TAPE OF THE MURDER AS IT HAPPENED. THE WHOLE WORLD WITNESSED IT. There is no place on Earth where Derek Chauvin isn't very well known and George Floyd's murder wasn't mourned. But that is how stupid dumb the murderer's lawyer is. After all who in his right mind would defend that scumbag? Thank you for your reply Nanoose! The testimoney of the top cop in that department was DEVASTATING. He said there was NO REASON for that to have happened. The cops WERE NEVER IN JEOPARDY. Boy. But since Chauvin is white and George Floyd was black and racists serve as jurists all the time we expect him to walk even though the murder has millions of witnesses.  Maybe even BILLIONS worldwide. I don't know if Canada is that a**backwards but the USA is known for it! :( This post was edited by RosieG at April 5, 2021 6:29 AM MDT

Funny, weren't you the one who kept saying what Chauvin did was just following his training?  I guess that isn't true.

No I said exactly what I just said above.   Nothing changed. 

I'm pretty sure you said he did what his training taught him.  Apparently, he didn't.

Nope. I said the same thing.  There was evidence presented by the rookie cop in court that the hold was taught in training but the suspect should be on their side not stomache. Which was why the rookie kept asking if they should put him on his side.  And Floyd had enough of the drug in his system to kill him. 

What they were taught in training was to put the person on their side.  Chauvin did not follow training and whether Floyd had drugs in his system is irrelevant if someone was compressing his neck and diaphragm.  How about you get face down and have someone kneel on your neck and chest - without drugs in your system - and let's see how long it takes you to stop breathing.  

What they were taught was a neck hold. Yes he was supposed to be in the "recovery position"...on the side.  
The drug overdose has everything to do with it. 
Again case will come down to cause of death....drug OD or the incorrect position during the restraint. 

As I have said I do not think these type of holds should be allowed anywhere in this country. But the fact is...they are legal. And those are the laws that will apply to this case.   

This is a legal hold in MN. (Below)

It is called "maximal restraint technique."   It is to be used on a suspect who is in cuffs and still combative.  Floyd was in cuffs and still combative.   We know this both from the video and the witness who testified he told Floyd to just stop fighting and let them put him in the car. 

 

Once again, you miss the nuance.  If Chauvin had put him in the proper position, the one he was taught, Floyd might still be alive.  

Well, after today's testimony, you may want to re-think your opinions although I'm pretty sure you're stuck in neutral:

"The Minneapolis doctor who declared George Floyd dead testified today that it's more likely Floyd died of oxygen deprivation than a heart attack or drug overdose.

• His testimony was followed by the Minneapolis police chief, who said Chauvin acted against his training and violated a "duty to care" for anyone in custody, regardless of whether they're a suspect.

The big picture: Dr. Bradford Langenfeld and Chief Medaria Arradondo's testimonies push back against key aspects of the defense's case.

Langenfeld testified that Floyd didn’t show specific symptoms that would be common after a heart attack or signs of drug toxins in his system, Axios' Shawna Chen reports.

• The county medical examiner ruled in 2020 that Floyd died of cardiac arrest.
• Langenfeld said today the most common causes of the type of sudden cardiac arrest Floyd suffered are blood loss and oxygen deprivation, making asphyxia a likely contributor to Floyd's death.

Arradondo testified that Chauvin kneeling on Floyd's neck was "not de-escalation."

• He added that Floyd's repeated cries of distress — "I can't breathe" — should have stopped Chauvin.

I do not have to rethink my opinion at all. 

The testimony proves what I stated...the case will come down to cause of death...the improper position or the drug overdose.    That is my opinion and they were testifying to it today.  

My opinion of what it will come down to has nothing to do with my opinion of the actions themselves. As I said the law should be clear leave the neck alone.  If that was the law at the time...this officer would have no possible defense. But it is not so he has a chance of getting off or getting a much lesser charge. 
My opinion is the unions prevent the firing of bad employees and gives the majority of employees a bad name. 
I also know the majority of these cases are caused by people resisting arrest.  

A reply that surprises me in no way at all.

I'm guessing you didn't hear today's testimony:

Chauvin trial: A use-of-force instructor at the Minneapolis Police Department testified that officers have never been trained to use the type of knee-on-neck restraint that Derek Chauvin employed against George Floyd.

I already stated Floyd was in the incorrect position.  

They are trained to use a neck hold technique.  As I explained above...it has already been introduced in the case against the rookie cop. 

They need to fix the law and remove the "maximal restaint technique" needs to be removed from there allowed possible actions. 

But that still would not effect this caae...have to apply laws in place at that time.

What part of "it was never part of their training" do you not understand?  You don't apply law that used to exist, you apply the laws that exist at the time of the occurrence.  You just can't admit you're wrong, can you.

I admit when I am wrong...I am not wrong.

IT WAS part of their training.  It is called MAXIMAL RESTRAINT TECHNIQUE.   

The 30-page training manual was submitted to court as evidence.  

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/mpd-training-materials-show-knee-to-neck-restraint-similar-to-the-one-used-on-floyd/ar-BB16vdIS

The chief testifying even said they may have been attempting to use this hold. 

Nelson draws out in cross-examination that two types of neck restraints were allowed within policy on May 25, 2020. And Arradondo acknowledges Chauvin used a neck restraint. Then Arradondo says neck restraints were not allowed to be used for indefinite time periods. Nelson draws out in cross-examination that two types of neck restraints were allowed within policy on May 25, 2020. And Arradondo acknowledges Chauvin used a neck restraint. Then Arradondo says neck restraints were not allowed to be used for indefinite time periods.

Arradondo said he has formed the opinion that Chauvin was using a conscious neck restraint. 

Nelson asked if using a knee on someone's neck to restrain them is against MPD policy.....

Arradondo clarified, "It is contrary to our training to indefinitely place your knee on a proned, handcuffed individual for an indefinite period of time."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/mpd-chief-head-of-training-testify-chauvins-use-of-force-on-floyd-was-against-policy/ar-BB1fjzDd


The hold was legal.  It was not performed correctly. Interestingly, the Chief only mentioned the amount of time...not the position. 

I do hope this cop goes to prison.  He is an example of a bad cop.  But there is a chance because of these holds being legal at the time....that he may get off.