Jump to content

This Aint Packers Talk v69


CWood21

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, BleedTheClock said:

People are the problem, not police. There are bad cops, bad doctors, bad military people....all people can be evil. To vilify all cops is ridiculous. Some of my best friends are great people and police officers. To lump them in with the evil cops (which do exist) is asinine. 

No, a police culture of overstepping authority, treating minorities with violence, and lying for each other in a twisted act of brotherhood is definitely still a problem.

But that's something that does appear to be improving slowly as society is holding these departments more accountable, especially with access to camera phones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, TransientTexan said:

if the ones that think others need vilifying are brainwashed and misrepresent what their opponents believe and draw false parallels to other situations. 

Some people mask what they try to say because what they believe is truly disgusting and ignorant . When they get called out for it , they get very angry and defensive. Hmmm...🤔

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, TransientTexan said:

How convenient. so you can just pretend to know what others are thinking... and then fight that strawman. 

Some people can draw conclusions without having things directly stated to them. Part of critical thinking , have you heard of it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, beekay414 said:

Now let's see if he stays there...

I'm pretty confident at least the manslaughter charge will stick. This is a completely different situation than most of these cases where the cop argues he had to shoot or use deadly force based his "belief" that the person was armed/was a danger to use force. That argument doesn't fit here given the guy was cuffed on the ground.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Packerraymond said:

A murder charge would result in an innocent verdict and then mass riots again.

What happened was manslaughter, I get that everyone is mad about what happened, but you can't just charge someone with the most severe charge because of emotions.

Murder 3 could still under Minn law if they prove there was an intent to cause any harm to him. At that point, if the harm becomes dealth, it's murder in the third degree. I agree, likely a manslaughter case, but obviously there was a big push to attach "murder" to this case and Murder 3 was pretty much the only one with a decent shot at conviction. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

No, a police culture of overstepping authority, treating minorities with violence, and lying for each other in a twisted act of brotherhood is definitely still a problem.

But that's something that does appear to be improving slowly as society is holding these departments more accountable, especially with access to camera phones.

Sure it’s a problem. But there are some awesome cops out there too. We can’t go to war with the freaking police. At least 90% of cops are good people. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Cheesehawk said:

Still have to prove intent to kill.  I am just going by general definition of second degree murder.  Each state will be a little different, maybe in Minnesota the statute will push it that way.  Even if he knows the suspect, and didn't like him, this still looks like manslaughter.  The officer used undue force on the suspect, which resulted in death.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ThatJerkDave said:

Preface:  I am not a lawyer, and I don't know Minnesota Law. 

As far as I can tell, this is a case of either second degree murder or involuntary manslaughter.  It would not be possible to find a person who looked at the situation objectively and determined that there was premeditation to this homicide.  So there goes first degree murder.  Second degree murder would take proving that the officer killed the suspect purposely.  That is probably also not going to be proven, but I could see an argument made for that charge.  One would have to know the Minnesota second degree murder definition to make that judgement.   I think a safer bet is the involuntary manslaughter.  The officer took neglectful actions resulting in a homicide.     This along with a charge for excessive force should be an easy case.

Preface: I am a lawyer, though not from Minnesota nor do I practice criminal law. 

Just a basic look at the law and the charges fit. Murder 3 involves a case where there was an underlying intent to harm and someone dies because of it even without the intent to kill. Classic example is taking a gun and firing it into a random crowd and it hits someone and kills them. That's third degree murder under MN law. The obvious appeal to a Murder 3 charge is that it allows the DA to say they charged him with "murder" which will appeal to the masses, and it also carries a max of 25 years in prison (whereas I think manslaughter in MN tops out at 10 or 15). The lesser charge manslaughter is even a tighter fit to the facts (as we know of them today), but again, not a "murder" charge and lesser penalty, hence why you bring both if you're the DA, while also not over-reaching for 2nd, and especially 1st degree, which absent some premeditation evidence we don't currently know about, would never stick. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Rainmaker90 said:

Some people can draw conclusions without having things directly stated to them. Part of critical thinking , have you heard of it?

sounds more like those "some people" are reflexively engaging in intellectual dishonesty rather than critical thinking. They can't debate policies based on their merits, so they have to cast their opponent as evil, even if they have to put words in their opponents' mouths in order to do so. 

Edited by TransientTexan
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...