Case against Minneapolis officers appears to be unraveling

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
405
Points
880
Case against Minneapolis officers appears to be unraveling before it gets to trial since facts matter

'This is a game changer,' says legal analyst when viewing Minneapolis Police training manual

Attorneys for former Minneapolis Police Officer Derek Chauvin are requesting the dismissal of murder and manslaughter charges against him for the death of George Floyd. They’re using the police training manual as justification, Townhall reported.

According to the Minneapolis Police Department training manual, officers are shown how to subdue violent or resisting suspects by placing their knee on the neck, something Law Officer previously reported.

Minneapolis leaders as well as the state attorney general were also aware of a plethora of additional exonerating details discussed in the video as well as listed toward the end of this article. It will be a legal battle royale watching it play out in the courtroom.

Analysts and attorneys at Court TV explain, according to Townhall. It’s worth a full watch:

“From coast-to-coast everyone, absolutely outraged, especially by that fact, the knee on the neck. Well, guess what folks, take a look at what you’re looking at right here. That is from the police training manual,” attorney and host Vinnie Politan said. “Where this all comes from is from a motion to dismiss. A motion to dismiss that was filed by Derek Chauvin’s attorneys saying that the knee on the neck is part of his training as a Minneapolis police officer. And there we see it in the manual on the left and on the right is what we all have seen in the video of Officer Chauvin. So, is this a game-changer?”

https://www.lawofficer.com/case-against-minneapolis-officers-appears-to-be-unraveling-before-it-gets-to-trial-since-facts-matter/
 

Haggis

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
72
Points
530
Bullcrap.

The use of force is authorized when executed in accordance with training and in a manner which is deemed reasonable given the totality of the situation. The real question is if this was an approved technique, was it applied correctly and only for the period of time required to gain and maintain control of the subject?
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
1
Points
430
Haggis said:
Bullcrap.

The use of force is authorized when executed in accordance with training and in a manner which is deemed reasonable given the totality of the situation. The real question is if this was an approved technique, was it applied correctly and only for the period of time required to gain and maintain control of the subject?

Haggis, I am going to appeal to your expertise on this.  "the period of time required to gain and maintain control of the subject?"  Defining what is necessary to maintain control might seem to me to be the debatable point here. I am aware of patients in hospitals, under sedation and unconscious being restrained by being shackled to their beds with handcuffs.
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
405
Points
880
Chris Pook said:
Haggis, I am going to appeal to your expertise on this.  "the period of time required to gain and maintain control of the subject?"  Defining what is necessary to maintain control might seem to me to be the debatable point here. I am aware of patients in hospitals, under sedation and unconscious being restrained by being shackled to their beds with handcuffs.

Yeah, I think what Haggis might be getting at is it all depends on how it stands up in court.

And it might be a short stand...
 

Donald H

Banned
Banned
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Would Derek Chauvin be eligible for a presidential pardon?

Even if not it's most likely that the outcome of the election for president will be the deciding factor.
 

Haggis

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
72
Points
530
Chris Pook said:
Haggis, I am going to appeal to your expertise on this.  "the period of time required to gain and maintain control of the subject?"  Defining what is necessary to maintain control might seem to me to be the debatable point here. I am aware of patients in hospitals, under sedation and unconscious being restrained by being shackled to their beds with handcuffs.

In most cases it takes more force to gain control of a subject than it does to maintain control.

It's been a while since I watched the videos of this incident but I recall Mr. Floyd was already in cuffs and face down while Chauvin maintained pressure on his neck.  The videos also show Chauvin with his hands in his pockets which would indicate that Floyd was not being actively resistant because it took Chauvin no effort to maintain his balance, something not easy to do for a single officer on a large struggling subject.

Ultimately a grand jury will decide if the force used, even if authorized was excessive by being too forceful or too prolonged.

Donald H said:
Would Derek Chauvin be eligible for a presidential pardon?

You are seriously jumping the gun! He has not even been tried yet.
 

Blackadder1916

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
78
Points
530
Donald H said:
Would Derek Chauvin be eligible for a presidential pardon?

No, Chauvin has been charged with violating Minnesota statutes.  Presidential pardon power is limited to federal offenses.
 

Oldgateboatdriver

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
30
Points
530
Personally, I think it's pretty poor lawyering on the part of the police officer's lawyer.

The technique may be in the training manual, but (1) it is not in the section about lethal force, is it? And, (2) The manual doesn't override the law on homicide, does it?

Here there has been a death and no judge will throw out the charges just because the so called technique is in the police training manual. The judge will say: We'll let the jury decide if the conduct of this officer, in light of all the facts that will come out at trial, including his training, meet the criteria of homicide or not.

But the lawyer has now given the prosecutor a reason to check potential members of the jury for knowledge of the training manual paired with a capacity to decide in an unbiased way on the basis of the facts that will be presented at trial - or just about - instead of pulling it out as evidence and surprise the hell out of everyone at trial with a sort of "If the glove don't fit, you must acquit" type of point.
 

Bruce Monkhouse

Army.ca Myth
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Reaction score
106
Points
780
Oldgateboatdriver said:
The technique may be in the training manual, but (1) it is not in the section about lethal force, is it? And, (2) The manual doesn't override the law on homicide, does it?

No, but it's also well taught that even things that are "less then lethal' can have lethal consequences.  We call those "unintended consequences'.
I'm sure almost no bar fighters ever meant to kill the other guy, but.....
 

Donald H

Banned
Banned
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Blackadder1916 said:
No, Chauvin has been charged with violating Minnesota statutes.  Presidential pardon power is limited to federal offenses.

Thanks blackadder! That's what I thought was true. So he'll have to be saved by some other political ploy. I always look at incidences like this in the US as being a motivator for Canada's cops who are a little overzealous of using lethal force. So far the Dziekański case is the one that stands out the most to me. Having said that, I have a very high opinioin of our mounties as compared to other police forces, even those in Canada.
 

Haggis

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
72
Points
530
Donald H said:
I always look at incidences like this in the US as being a motivator for Canada's cops who are a little overzealous of using lethal force.

How many Canadian cops are overzealous in the use of force in your opinion?  You seem to infer that Canadian cops are on par with our American counterparts both in their use of force and the method in which those incidents are dealt with by the governments.
What do you base that on? 

Before you reply, here's a few websites I suggest you visit for a closer look at how use of force incidents are investigated across Canada:

Ontario Special Investigation Unit
Independent Investigations Office of British Columbia
Alberta Serious Incident Response Team
Nova Scotia Serios Incident Response Team
and if you want to practice your French
Québec Bureau des Enquetes Independant


Donald H said:
So far the Dziekański case is the one that stands out the most to me. Having said that, I have a very high opinion of our Mounties as compared to other police forces, even those in Canada.

I would suggest, based on the highlighted part of your quote, that you actually know very little about this incident and, more importantly, it's aftermath and how the RCMP treated their own members.  A little research may shake your faith in the Queen's Cowboys.
 

Donald H

Banned
Banned
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Haggis said:
  You seem to infer that Canadian cops are on par with our American counterparts both in their use of force and the method in which those incidents are dealt with by the governments.

No, I'm inferring that Canada's mounties have a much better record.

What do you base that on?

Several things but let's just deal with the American cops' record of killing black people. The  Dziekański case stood out at the time because it wasn't the norm.

Before you reply, here's a few websites I suggest you visit for a closer look at how use of force incidents are investigated across Canada:

I would suggest, based on the highlighted part of your quote, that you actually know very little about this incident and, more importantly, it's aftermath and how the RCMP treated their own members.  A little research may shake your faith in the Queen's Cowboys.

You're welcome to suggest whatever you like but the method of investigating isn't nearly as important as seeing incidents such as the killing of George Floyd and some of the others. Do you know of some comparible incidents perped by our Mounties?

:cheers:
 

Good2Golf

Army.ca Legend
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
162
Points
780
Donald H said:
I always look at incidences like this in the US as being a motivator for Canada's cops who are a little overzealous of using lethal force. So far the Dziekański case is the one that stands out the most to me. Having said that, I have a very high opinioin of our mounties as compared to other police forces, even those in Canada.

Do you proofread before you post?

The highlighted portion of your earlier statement is precisely why Haggis and others took issue with you saying that Canadian cops are a little overzealous using lethal force. 

Your follow on qualification of Mounties implies that it is provincial and municipal police forces in Canada that are overzealous using lethal force.
 

Donald H

Banned
Banned
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Good2Golf said:
Do you proofread before you post?

The highlighted portion of your earlier statement is precisely why Haggis and others took issue with you saying that Canadian cops are a little overzealous using lethal force. 

Your follow on qualification of Mounties implies that it is provincial and municipal police forces in Canada that are overzealous using lethal force.

With all due respects, you didn't highlight that quote properly to indicate what it means.

So it means that those incidents in the US serve as a motivator for some overzealous Canadian cops.

It's not saying that Canada's cops are a little overzealous. I'm saying that the US practice could serve as a motivation for Canada's cops to be a little overzealous. But I can see how the misunderstanding occurred. I greatly fear that the poisoned police relationship with their citizens in the US could lead Canadian cops to copy that mess. I also fear that the US penal system, the most flawed  system in all the world's first world countries, could become a model for Canada under a Conservative government in which punishment is preferred over rehabilitation.

:cheers:

 

Kat Stevens

Army.ca Fixture
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
91
Points
530
Donald H said:
With all due respects, you didn't highlight that quote properly to indicate what it means.

So it means that those incidents in the US serve as a motivator for some overzealous Canadian cops.

It's not saying that Canada's cops are a little overzealous. I'm saying that the US practice could serve as a motivation for Canada's cops to be a little overzealous. But I can see how the misunderstanding occurred. I greatly fear that the poisoned police relationship with their citizens in the US could lead Canadian cops to copy that mess. I also fear that the US penal system, the most flawed  system in all the world's first world countries, could become a model for Canada under a Conservative government in which punishment is preferred over rehabilitation.

:cheers:

You really have a low opinion of Canadians, don't you?
 

Good2Golf

Army.ca Legend
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
162
Points
780
Donald H said:
With all due respects, you didn't highlight that quote properly to indicate what it means.

So it means that those incidents in the US serve as a motivator for some overzealous Canadian cops.

It's not saying that Canada's cops are a little overzealous. I'm saying that the US practice could serve as a motivation for Canada's cops to be a little overzealous. But I can see how the misunderstanding occurred. I greatly fear that the poisoned police relationship with their citizens in the US could lead Canadian cops to copy that mess. I also fear that the US penal system, the most flawed  system in all the world's first world countries, could become a model for Canada under a Conservative government in which punishment is preferred over rehabilitation.

:cheers:

With all due respects in return, you precisely said Canadian cops who are a little overzealous...here:

Donald H said:
I always look at incidences like this in the US as being a motivator for Canada's cops who are a little overzealous of using lethal force.

This is not the same as you attempted to correct immediately above...”could serve as a motivation for Canada's cops to be a little overzealous...”

The onus is on the communicator to ensure their message is clear, not the communicatee to not misunderstand what they said.  If you had used the potentiality phrasing the first time, many of us would likely not have taken issue with a grammatical statement that some Canadian cops were overzealous with the use of force.

Regards
G2G
 

Haggis

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
72
Points
530
Donald H said:
So it means that those incidents in the US serve as a motivator for some overzealous Canadian cops.

It's not saying that Canada's cops are a little overzealous. I'm saying that the US practice could serve as a motivation for Canada's cops to be a little overzealous.

Again, twice, you infer that police misconduct in the US has led/will lead to Canadian cops behaving in a similar manner.  Do you have any idea what type of use of force training Canadian police undergo?  It's designed with officer and public safety at the forefront and de-escalation as the goal.

Donald H said:
I greatly fear that the poisoned police relationship with their citizens in the US could lead Canadian cops to copy that mess.

The only way I can see that happening is if our "woke" Liberal leaders continue to allow the discussion to be led, influenced and dominated by those who want to stoke the fires of police mistrust for their own social agendas.

Our law enforcement agencies are very professional, well led and very well trained.  Could they be better trained?  Of course....everyone could.  Police, firefighters, paramedics, social workers etc..  But where will that law enforcement training money come from in the climate of "defund the police"?

.
 

brihard

Army.ca Fixture
Mentor
Reaction score
271
Points
830
Donald H said:
Thanks blackadder! That's what I thought was true. So he'll have to be saved by some other political ploy. I always look at incidences like this in the US as being a motivator for Canada's cops who are a little overzealous of using lethal force. So far the Dziekański case is the one that stands out the most to me. Having said that, I have a very high opinioin of our mounties as compared to other police forces, even those in Canada.

IT's worth noting that the Dziekanski incident caused a pretty immediate and widespread change in how tasers are employed. The threshold for their use increased, and the precautions to be taken after any multiple or high-risk deployment increased. Note that the members did not face any criminal liability for use of force. The resulting criminal proceedings  came about on grounds of perjury. It's worth noting that there's an ongoing OPP criminal increstigation into potential obstruction of justice by senior RCMP in this. They may have obstructed proper disclosure of evidence that would have been relevant to the defense of those officers.

I'm not suggesting the situation on the ground was well handled, but I am putting it out there that there were very serious problems with what happened to the officers afterwards. Also note that it resulted in immediate and substantial reforms to police use of force nation wide. It's weird that you cite Dziekanski in the same breath as lethal force. He died due to medical complications, absolutely, but the taser is not a lethal device. Any deaths contemporary with taser use pretty invariably come back as being linked to serious underlying medical events happening in the subject.

You described situations in the US as "being a motivator for Canada's cops who are a little overzealous of using lethal force". I'm going to be blunt; you're out to lunch on that. The ituation is very different up here, and Canadian police tend to face considerably more regulation and oversight than most US cops. It's rare for instances touted as 'excessive force' up here to stand up to scrutiny once the facts are actually known. I'm not saying it never happens, but it's rare. Even more so if your criteria is deadly force. I think you have some confirmation bias at play here. You should either back your claims with examples, or perhaps step back from them.
 

Donald H

Banned
Banned
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Brihard said:
You described situations in the US as "being a motivator for Canada's cops who are a little overzealous of using lethal force".

Yes, for some cops who are a little overzealous. And not saying that all cops or the majority of cops are such.

The ituation is very different up here, and Canadian police tend to face considerably more regulation and oversight than most US cops.

I couldn't agree more!

It's rare for instances touted as 'excessive force' up here to stand up to scrutiny once the facts are actually known. I'm not saying it never happens, but it's rare. Even more so if your criteria is deadly force.

Absolutely! Our Mounties are very highly rated against all other police forces that come to mind.

I think you have some confirmation bias at play here. You should either back your claims with examples, or perhaps step back from them.

I'll stand behind any claim I've made but I can't allow people to misquote  me. Please do challenge my claims but don't do so on the basis of your political convictions as opposed to mine.
 

brihard

Army.ca Fixture
Mentor
Reaction score
271
Points
830
Donald H said:
I'll stand behind any claim I've made but I can't allow people to misquote  me. Please do challenge my claims but don't do so on the basis of your political convictions as opposed to mine.

I quoted you directly. You claim that Canadian police are being 'motivated' to act in an overzealous manner in deadly force incidents because of things happening in the US. I can only be so tactful in asking what the hell you're going on about. How are the actions of American police motivating some proportion of Canadian police to be 'overzealous', or to use deadly force when it's not appropriate? You made the claim, the onus is on you to back it. A claim like that ought to be backed. You cited only Dziekanski, which was a long time ago and a very questionable example at best.

On a separate note, making assumptions about my political beliefs isn't likely to carry you very far in this.
 
Top