George Floyd

A Reinstated Third-Degree Murder Charge Gives Jurors Another Option To Convict Derek Chauvin for Killing George Floyd

Like the felony murder charge, it carries a presumptive sentence more than eight years longer than the manslaughter charge.

|

The judge presiding over Derek Chauvin's trial for killing George Floyd today reinstated a third-degree murder charge against the former Minneapolis police officer. That is the same charge Chauvin reportedly was prepared to accept under a plea deal that fell through a few days after Floyd's death. The decision to allow a third-degree murder charge, which followed an appeals court's ruling that Hennepin County District Court Judge Peter Cahill had erred in dismissing the count last October, gives the jury another, possibly more appealing option for convicting Chauvin of a crime more serious than the manslaughter charge he also faces.

As of yesterday, five jurors had been seated in the case, and opening arguments are expected to begin on March 29. Potential jurors have been asked about their reactions to the bystander video that shows Chauvin kneeling on Floyd's neck for more than eight minutes during a May 25 arrest for using a counterfeit $20 bill to buy cigarettes. That video—during which a prone, handcuffed Floyd repeatedly complains that he cannot breathe, begs for relief, and cries out for his mother—provoked bipartisan horror and nationwide protests against police brutality last year.

The second-degree manslaughter charge against Chauvin seems to easily fit the facts of the case. It alleges that he caused Floyd's death "by his culpable negligence, creating an unreasonable risk and consciously [taking] the chances of causing great bodily harm to another." While that offense carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison, the presumptive sentence under Minnesota's sentencing guidelines is four years.

Chauvin also faces a charge of unintentional second-degree murder, which applies to someone who "causes the death of a human being, without intent to effect the death of any person, while committing or attempting to commit a felony offense"—in this case, third-degree assault. That "felony murder" charge carries a maximum penalty of 40 years in prison, but the presumptive penalty is 150 months, or 12.5 years.

In the vast majority of jurisdictions that authorize felony murder charges, the underlying crime has to be distinct from the act that caused the victim's death. Someone who participates in a burglary or robbery that turns fatal, for example, can be charged with felony murder—a policy that has been widely criticized because it can result in severe punishment for people peripherally involved in crimes that result in someone's death, regardless of their intent or knowledge. But in Minnesota, the "independent felony" rule does not apply, which means an assault that unintentionally kills someone, which ordinarily would be treated as manslaughter, can instead be charged as murder, dramatically increasing the potential penalty.

If jurors reject that logic but think the manslaughter charge does not adequately reflect Chauvin's culpability in Floyd's death, the third-degree murder charge reinstated by Judge Cahill will give them a third option. It alleges that Chauvin caused Floyd's death by "perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life."

Cahill initially rejected that charge because some case law suggests it is appropriate only for conduct that does not target any particular individual—firing a gun into a crowd, for example. He thought a third-degree murder charge could "be sustained only in situations in which the defendant's actions were 'eminently dangerous to other persons' and were not specifically directed at the particular person whose death occurred."

In 2019, however, former Minneapolis police officer Mohamed Noor, who fatally shot Justine Damond in 2017 after she called 911 to report a possible assault in the alley behind her house, was convicted of third-degree murder as well as second-degree manslaughter. The Minnesota Court of Appeals upheld Noor's conviction last month, and it cited that decision last Friday, when it ordered Cahill to reconsider the prosecution's motion to restore the third-degree murder charge against Chauvin. Yesterday the Minnesota Supreme Court declined to review the appeals court's ruling.

The maximum penalty for third-degree murder is 25 years, 15 years less than the maximum for unintentional second-degree murder. But the presumptive penalty is the same: 150 months, which is the sentence that Noor received.

Under a deal that U.S. Attorney General William Barr reportedly rejected in late May, Chauvin would have pled guilty to third-degree murder. Barr's approval was required because Chauvin wanted a guarantee that he would not also face federal civil rights charges for the same underlying conduct. The New York Times reported that Barr was concerned that the sentence contemplated in the proposed agreement—"more than 10 years," according to the Times—would be widely perceived as too lenient. Barr also did not want to preempt decisions by Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, who took charge of the case a few days later.

A federal prosecution theoretically could expose Chauvin to an additional sentence as long as life. But convicting him under federal law would require proving that he "willfully" violated Floyd's constitutional rights, which is a formidable challenge.

Three other former Minneapolis officers—J. Alexander KuengThomas Lane, and Tou Thao—are charged with aiding and abetting Chauvin's assault on Floyd by actively assisting him or failing to intervene. They will be tried separately.

NEXT: ‘If You Wear a Federal Badge, You Can Inflict Excessive Force on Someone With Little Fear of Liability,’ Complains Judge Don Willett

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. This is about the same dead nigger whose fellow dead niggers have declared war on whites. yes? Fuck him.

    1. Fuck off, asshole

      1. Naw, follow up on his logic, look at his handle, and he’s just your garden variety Russian Communist troll.

        1. Take out the word “nigger” and replace it with “black(s),” and there is a point being made. To pretend that this case has not become a magnet for black racists to rally around is denying reality, to a certain extent.

          1. No, there’s no point being made. First we’d have to see the declaration of war on whites (spoiler alert – it doesn’t exist). Even if it did, what does that have to George Floyd? The original comment states “Fucj him” as if he’s behind some imaginary war.

            1. Oh, I see. So when the term “war” is used in any statement, the statement is immediately invalidated by the absence of a formal declaration of war? Get the fuck out of here. Fucking clown.

            2. “see the declaration of war on whites” — you mean the constant and compulsive witch-hunting of them through riots, charges, accusations and popularity imprisonment doesn’t count?

              When’s the last time there was this much madness over a black cop shooting someone who was resisting arrest?? What’s that – crickets?

              1. How about a black Capitol police officer shooting an unarmed woman protester, presenting zero threat to him or others?
                Any madness there?

        2. I see somebody else has worked with Russian ex-pats too…

          Yeah, they aren’t known for their racial sensitivity. Or religious tolerance either.

        3. Um… his logic seems to indicate that he believes in zombies.

    2. Your kind ain’t welcome here. Git.

    3. Pretty much!!

    4. Late to the party… And I normally eschew profane responses… But I agree… Fuck off.

  2. Leading headline. You’re presuming the officer killed him when he had 4x the lethal dose of fentanyl in him.

    1. The officer did kill him. It doesn’t matter that he might have died later for other reasons, whether ten seconds later from drugs or fifty years later from a heart attack. The officer kneeling on his neck and cutting off his blood flow and oxygen supply is what did, in fact, in reality, kill him.

      1. Why even bother having a trial?

        1. Geiger really, really cares about police officers and law and order — when the police officer is kneeling on some black guy’s neck.

          Geiger doesn’t care quite so much when he has to choose between loyalty to MAGA and the police:

          https://reason.com/2021/03/06/josh-hawleys-toxic-populism/#comment-8794968

          1. “wait” is conditional for you got it

          2. How many more times do you need to get slapped around, lying lefty shit?

            #HO2

          3. You appear to have forgotten you were using your “White Knight” account but your “SQRLSY” composition style.

            1. This ^

              1. Troglodyte power pigs everywhere, of all stripes:

                “My violence GOOD, your violence BAD!”

                Has this ever been tried before? What were the results?

                You assholes are the EXACT same type of unthinking brutes, as the ones who killed Jesus! http://www.churchofsqrls.com/Do_Gooders_Bad/
                Read it and admit it!

                1. Wow, Melvin.

                  You have SQRSLY, WK, and Sarcasmic. Any other socks you care to tell us about?

                  How’s Roxanne doing?

                  1. Thanks for asking, you oh-so-concerned, benevolent being!

                    Last time I checked with Melvin, Roxanne was doing fine. Her grip on reality (and living a benevolent life, knowing that “what comes around, goes around”, AKA, “enlightened self-interest”), it seems to me, is FAR better than YOURS!

                    1. “Her grip on reality …..”

                      How about her grip on your dick, you sick pederast? How about your grip on reality, you twisted goon?

                    2. My grip on reality includes living a benevolent life, knowing that “what comes around, goes around”, AKA, that “enlightened self-interest” is a REAL thing!

                      Does YOURS? I doubt it! You can start studying your sickness, and how to heal it, here! M. Scott Peck, The People of the Lie, https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0684848597/reasonmagazinea-20/

                    3. Fuck off, sarc.

                  2. “Take out the word “nigger” and replace it with “black(s),” and there is a point being made”

                    You just did that but not the point you intended. Or perhaps it was.

                    1. Should I be reading White Fragility? Or, would you prefer to recite it to me instead, from memory?

                    2. You know, Goldilicks Gorillashit, there IS a “middle way” for those of us who seek it! To neither be a confrontation-seeking, self-righteous EVIL person, who yells “racism!” at the drop of a hat (as a method of self-seeking), NOR a self-righteous EVIL person, who yells “you’re oppressing me!” whenever someone DARES to criticize them for spewing HATE-HATE-HATE and self-righteousness, all day every day, like YOU do, hate-consumed one!

                      Just QUIT on your “unquenchable thirst”, Evil One Junior! It does NOT lead to your “Happy Place”!

                    3. Fuck off White Knight/Sarc/Echospinner/and I guess I can throw Jeff in there too.

                    4. I have no idea what you are referring to.

                      Perhaps you can give me other acceptable alternative terms for race which would make the post a “point to be made”. Your words. Not mine.

                    5. Some folks think that the way to prove themselves superior to the next guy, is to drive the EXACTLY best car. Or smoke the right smokes, wear the right shoes, live in the best house, be married to the best trophy wife, and on and on.

                      Goldilicks Gorillashit here thinks that the VERY best brand of smug hatred for “the other” is what will get Goldilicks Gorillashit “in” with the hipster crowd! I have tried and tried and tried, to get Goldilicks Gorillashit to see this. I’m not sure how much hope might be left. Goldilicks Gorillashit might need to learn the hard way, through suffering. If anyone can help Goldilicks Gorillashit to see the Light… Please do! I’m about all tapped out!

                    6. Fuck off White Knight/Sarc/Echospinner

                    7. “You just”

                      Oh hey everyone a passive aggressive Karen is raceturbating again.

                2. “You assholes are the EXACT same type of unthinking brutes, as the ones who killed Jesus!”

                  Jews?

                  1. Excerpts from the brilliant, insightful text found in the cited link:

                    “The Jews killed Jesus” say those of shallow understanding. A BETTER, more detailed understanding would be, “First we grew fish brains, and the instincts and emotions than went with them. Then ditto lizard brains, then monkeys, then apes, and human hunter-gatherer brains, instincts, and emotions. As culture-bearing, supposedly fully thinking beings, by now we should have made that post-hunter-gatherer mental, ethical, and moral leap. Jesus (and etc.) was (were) killed by those who couldn’t or wouldn’t make that final leap.”

                    Also…

                    From https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20201016-why-some-people-are-cruel-to-others : “Yet there is a hidden upside of do-gooder derogation. Once we have pulled down the do-gooder, we are more open to their message. ” End quote. It’s not a HUGE amount of good news, but at least SOME good news. AFTER we have killed Jesus, Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr., and they are DEAD men, and can NOT possibly steal our women any more, THEN we are free to FINALLY listen safely to their messages!

                    1. Fuck off, sarc.

                    2. “Relax! Just Because I am Right and You are Wrong, Doesn’t Mean that I Want to Steal ‘Your’ Woman”

                      Goldilicks Girlshit the Power Grabber thinks that ALL beings EVERYWHERE, belong to Goldilicks Girlshit!!!

                      Goldilicks Girlshit… Have you ever heard the phrase “unquenchable thirst”, what does it mean to YOU, and do You think that it is a GOOD thing?

                      Hint: “unquenchable thirst” does NOT lead to Your Happy Place!

                    3. Fuck off, Melvin.

                    4. So Jews.

                    5. You who worship the money-power-status variety of “success” would be well served by listening to the words of “The Boss”, AKA Bruce Springsteen… From the song “Badlands”, which is an anthem to the pursuit of TRUE happiness, which is a path that you are NOT on right now!

                      Poor man wanna be rich,
                      rich man wanna be king,
                      And a king ain’t satisfied,
                      till he rules everything…

                      Got news for ya, Buddy… King ain’t NEVER gonna rule everything! So this mentality is a sure-fire guarantee for dissatisfaction, for unhappiness.

                      Jesus warned us about the “yeast of the Pharisees” (hypocrisy in general), meaning as an analogy, a tiny-tiny biological infection or seed can spread and spread and spread, and contaminate an entire culture or society. This idea that I can gain more, by cutting you down, is one of those idea-infections (“toxic memes” in modern parlance). Once it starts, it is hard to stop. It might apply to status and money and power, especially in sick organizations, but if those 3 things are your be-all and end-all, I really do feel sorry for you. “No good deed goes unpunished”, and “nice guys finish last” applies to money-power-status; yes, they often do! But NOT to genuine self-esteem! You can choose to serve high principles, or to serve money and being “correct” politically… You can’t serve both. Choose wisely!

                    6. Ok Jews, I understand.

          4. HO2

      2. The officer did not kill him. Again, go look at the autopsy report. Big overdose of fentanyl, Covid-positive, and being a generally fat fuck, coupled with no evidence of physiological damage or bruising to the neck or airway, equals no causation by any of the officers for Floyd’s death.

        It just looked bad on video. Something their training materials—which instructed them to place people like Floyd in exactly that position—failed to take into account.

        You want to say the officers might have been negligent in not recognizing an incipient opiate overdose, and failed to fully monitor Floyd’s vital signs, you might have a point. But murder? You’re out of your mind.

        1. “It just looked bad on video.”

          If you cannot immediately make up your mind after watching a heavily edited 18-second clip without any context, then justice is dead.

          1. But several CACLL commenters here in the commentariat were able to conclude that Kyle Rittenhouse acted in self defense after watching a shaky video of people running around with guns:

            https://reason.com/2020/08/26/2-dead-1-gunman-arrested-in-kenosha-riots-as-family-of-jacob-blake-calls-for-calm/#comment-8425263

            1. “CACLL”

              Are you sure this time?

            2. So you agree that people should jump to conclusions based on out-of-context video clips?

            3. Yeah, the full video was even greater proof. Thanks for playing.

        2. 1. The officer kneeled on his neck long past teh point he stopped breathing.

          2. If the officer did not kill him by kneeling on his neck, then he did not render medical assistance in time, and intentionally.

          3. The officer was responsible for his death.

          1. “He killed him, and did not kill him. These are the facts. Let it be known that our judgment here today comports with these self-evident facts; he killed him, even if he did not. He is guilty, even if he is not.”

            How long was the term of your judgeship in The Star Chamber?

          2. The counts of the indictment under Minnesota law are ones that require Chauvin’s actions be the cause of death, not just vaguely “responsible” in that he did not take action to prevent it. So under your “did not render medical assistance” theory, the correct verdict is acquittal.

          3. Goddamnit. Read the autopsy report. Then emote. https://www.hennepin.us/-/media/hennepinus/residents/public-safety/documents/floyd-autopsy-6-3-20.pdf

            If the knee on his neck cut off his airway, there’d be bruising there. Or petechiae. Or other indicia of strangulation. The coroner didn’t find any.

            As far as render medical assistance, maybe. The guy was going into respiratory arrest because the stupid motherfucker swallowed his drug stash instead of just admitting he was in trouble. (Added comedy: defense counsel a few weeks ago, visited the police car that Floyd was initially placed in. I guess it had been sitting under seal in the police motor pool. It certainly hadn’t been cleaned, as counsel found some half chewed pills which tested positive for fentanyl, with Floyd’s DNA on them.)

            You’re stealing a bunch of bases too in claiming any denial of medical attention was either intentional, or with the aim of killing Floyd. As for responsibility, Floyd would’ve died whether they took him out of that car or not. He was dead the moment he decided to swallow a bunch of drugs, and then lie to the cops about what he’d done.

        3. Yup the defense attorneys are going to argue that.

          We saw what happened.

        4. I actually did read the autopsy report. It mentions none of those things as the cause of death. It does state the cause of death is “cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression.”
          Manner of death listed as homicide.

          You’d have to be plum fucking stupid to presume kneeling on his neck was just a coincidence to his death.

          1. That was the revised report after pressure from the D.A. The original was released after a lawsuit. You’ve been had.

          2. Same people argue it was just a coincidence that Capitol police officer, Brian Sicknick, died the day after he battled MAGA rioters.

            1. There’s two of the prime MAGA rioter-lovin’, dismissive suspects right above me.

            2. Battled? Don’t be ridiculous.

              I was under the impression that these wild Trump supporters were armed to the teeth when they encircled the defenseless Sicknick and then took turns blowing off his limbs with their automatic weapons just like in Robocop before finally using a fire extinguisher to deliver the coup de grâce by ruthlessly smashing his skull to a bloody pulp!

              Can you imagine the look on the coroner’s face when they must have dumped that headless stiff on the table? I bet the fire extinguisher was still there, sticking out of his neck!

              1. Police officer dies. It’s all a big joke to Geiger.

                1. Police officer dies? Well, if may so bold as to inquire, whatever in the world happened to police officer killed?

                  You filled your own balloon with shit and popped it. You deal with the mess, retard.

                2. You do realize that everything you were initially told was a lie, right? Like, made up out of whole cloth, lie…

                  His own family discounts the initial “official version” of his death.

                  1. Well, now, now.

                    He died at or around the time of the “insurrection” so we can safely conclude that he was basically, in other words, effectively, completely and totally killed by MAGA terrorists.

                    1. It’s a pretty good bet.

                    2. “It’s a pretty good bet.”

                      If you’re retarded, and you are. So, sure.

                  2. *Everything*?

                    The most important fact is still very true: Brian Sicknick is dead the day after fighting a mob of MAGA rioters. That hasn’t changed.

                    1. “The most important fact is still very true: Brian Sicknick is dead the day after fighting a mob of MAGA rioters.”

                      Most important fact in ….. what? Your fantasy? He wasn’t killed. So, where is all this going? I know. You’re a leftist retard. That is where it is going. That is where it will always go.

      3. The officer kneeling on his neck and cutting off his blood flow and oxygen supply is what did, in fact, in reality, kill him.

        Or he died from the Fentanyl overdose in spite of Chauvin being on his neck.

        1. Then the officer intentionally did not provide medical assistance.

          1. Is this the last episode of Seinfeld? What medical training do you think the officers had to stop a fentanyl OD?

      4. Autopsy said it was a lethal dose of fentanyl and meth. He was saying he couldn’t breathe well before a knee touched him. Do you know how mist die of fentanyl? From your post you do not.

        1. “He was saying he couldn’t breathe well before a knee touched him.”

          That argument is not helping your case.

          1. Actually, it is. Dumbass.

          2. Er, no, it helps the case.

            It’s a very simple matter of law; if there’s a reasonable possibility that the fentanyl killed Floyd, the only lawful verdict on the charges Chauvin is indicted on is acquittal. One element of all the charges against Chauvin is that his actions caused the death, and all elements have to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

            If the fentanyl was already disrupting Floyd’s breathing before restraint, that’s evidence the fentanyl was already killing him, and thus helps makes it reasonable to conclude that Floyd died of a fentanyl overdose, not because of acts Chauvin took.

            The blood fentanyl level, all the physical evidence from the autopsy, and the fact that Floyd claimed to be having trouble breathing before restraint, all point to an overdose death. Which means the provide reasonable doubt that Chauvin’s actions were the cause of death, and thus they legally require an acquittal on the charges of the indictment.

            1. I think you missed the part where White Knight’s feelings supersede that entire analysis.

      5. The prosecution has to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the knee killed him before the fentanyl did. Given the physical evidence is all 100% consistent with death from a fentanyl overdose, how, exactly, do you imagine that’s actually possible?

      6. That’s not what’s in the coroners report. Get ready for more riots, Chauvin is going free.

      7. During the trial it will be asked if what the officers did would have caused the death of someone not on the level of fentanyl Floyd was on. The Medical Examiner did state that 3 ng/mL is enough to cause death and Floyd had 11 ng/mL in his system. The FBI asked the Armed Forces Medical Examiner to review Baker’s autopsy and they agreed with his findings, writing “his death was caused by the police subdual and restraint” with cardiovascular disease and drug intoxication contributing.” The final outcome of the trial will be determining how much responsibility Floyd had in his own death.

      8. He died while being restrained, which is not the same as dying from being restrained.
        It is entirely possible that Floyd was going to die from the drugs right then, no matter what anyone did. If he had not resisted, he would have died in the back seat of the squad car. If the police had not shown up, he would have died in his own parked car.

      9. The officer never cut off anything

      10. George Floyd:
        Was already saying he “couldn’t breathe” before a knee came within 3 feet of his neck.
        Had no neck injury of any kind in his autopsy.
        Tested for 11ng/mL of fentanyl and 86ng/mL of morphine, among other drugs. The fentanyl alone is a lethal level.
        #GeorgeFloydAutopsyReport
        http://www.autopsyfiles.org/reports/Other/floyd,%20george_report.pdf
        If a cel phone microphone can clearly pick up your voice from 20+ feet way outdoors on a street, any lethal breathing problems you are experiencing are not due to compression of your windpipe.

      11. “and cutting off his blood flow and oxygen supply ”

        Fact not in evidence.

        His windpipe was unobstructed enough for his voice to be picked up on a cel phone microphone 20 feet away.

        Given the autopsy report, there’s just no way for anyone to conclude *beyond a reasonable doubt* that it was Chauvin’s actions, and not the drugs in his system, that killed George Floyd.
        http://www.autopsyfiles.org/reports/Other/floyd,%20george_report.pdf

        It’s *possible* that he did. More likely he was killed by the drugs he took.

    2. There is no fixed “lethal dose” of fentanyl. What might give a junky a moderate high would likely kill a person without any tolerance.

      1. What might give a junky a moderate high would likely kill a person without any tolerance.

        So all the prosecution has to do is show that Floyd was such a massive junkie that the blood concentration of fentanyl found in his blood was only evidence of a high, and not affecting his respiratory function at all. Certainly not causing him to suffer pulmonary edema in any way.

        Sounds like a great plan.

        1. “…blood concentration of fentanyl found in his blood…”

          What I get for trying to post here while listening to a conference call. LOL.

          Anyway, I wouldn’t be surprised at all if Ellison was able to get Murder convictions on all of them. People are scared, the Mob has spoken, and we’re in a post-fact world now. Yay.

          1. The jurors are either terrified of blmantifa or are blmantifa activists themselves who have already decided Chauvin is guilty.

      2. His levels were 3 times what is considered a lethal dose. His lungs were more than twice the weight they should have been, he basically drowned in his own fluids. Which points to a fentanyl OD.

    3. Citation needed. I know you aren’t going to cite the medical examiner’s report, because that clearly states he died of “cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression.”

      Since he also tested positive for Covid, should we also count him as a Covid death?

      1. “I know you aren’t going to cite the medical examiner’s report, because that clearly states he died of “cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression.”

        Oh, does it?

        https://www.hennepin.us/-/media/hennepinus/residents/public-safety/documents/floyd-autopsy-6-3-20.pdf

        Or is that just the case title?

        1. Shh. He doesn’t know they had to release the original report after a lawsuit.

          1. I always grapple with the issue of whether people like this are aware that they are full of shit, or if they genuinely have no idea. I mean, he is literally quoting from the report, but it does not seem like he ever took the time to even think about what he was reading before permanently cementing a completely incorrect conclusion in his brain.

            Evidence and facts literally do not matter. We now exist in a world where even if you provide these people with everything they need to educate themselves, they are just completely incapable of engaging with the material in any meaningful way and will just barrel through things with a complete lack of reading comprehension.

            There is truly no floor for the stupidity. I suppose it has probably always been this way but, it seems, over the last five years like it has multiplied exponentially. People used to be ashamed and would even hide their mistakes, but now they do not even bother trying to conceal it. Instead, they revel in it with the utmost confidence.

            1. FWIW, and that’s not very much, I’ve given some guy the benefit of the doubt. As opposed to someone like jeff.

    4. George Floyd:
      Was already saying he “couldn’t breathe” before a knee came within 3 feet of his neck.
      Had no neck injury of any kind in his autopsy.
      Tested for 11ng/mL of fentanyl and 86ng/mL of morphine, among other drugs. The fentanyl alone is a lethal level.
      #GeorgeFloydAutopsyReport
      http://www.autopsyfiles.org/reports/Other/floyd,%20george_report.pdf
      If a cel phone microphone can clearly pick up your voice from 20+ feet way outdoors on a street, any lethal breathing problems you are experiencing are not due to compression of your windpipe.

  3. Was it not the case that Floyd specifically requested to be restrained on the ground after claiming he couldn’t breath in the back seat of the cop car?

    https://www.fox9.com/news/transcript-of-officers-body-camera-shows-george-floyd-told-officers-i-cant-breathe-before-being-restrained

    In other words, Floyd’s “breathing” problems were not being caused by the restraint. Not only was he high as a kite, but he also claimed to have recently had COVID. This factors should play a very important role in the case.

    If I had to wager, I would bet Chauvin walks. Minneapolis will burn in any event, but I think he walks.

    1. Are you saying the drugs in his system were the cause of his not breathing well? Then the cops are culpable for not getting the medical help he needed.

      1. Negligence is not synonymous with murder.

        1. “I think he walks”

          There are charges other than murder against Chauvin. As outlined in TFA.

          1. I think he walks.

            1. I think he SHOULD walk, but I don’t think he WILL walk. The prosecutor overcharged. The autopsy report shows he didn’t die from asphyxiation, and Chauvin can demonstrate that he dianythingy what he was trained to do, and if the procedures are wrong, that’s not his fault.
              But the jury pool is already saying they’re scared to acquit, so there’s no way this is anything close to a fair trial.

              1. You are probably right.

          2. Yes. All of which (2nd degree murder, 3rd degree murder, and 2nd degree manslaughter, as specified in Minnesota statute law) require that Chauvin’s actions be the cause of death, not that his inactions failed to prevent a death.

        2. Even if intentional negligence? Are you making up a new category of murder, “intentional negligence”?

          1. What?

          2. Intentional negligence? Hilarious.

            1. It’s a pretty accurate description of Chauvin’s actions.

              1. If you have shit for brains.

      2. Lol. Youre sounding like WK here. You just know it is the officers fault and no facts will change your mind.

        1. Not just here.

      3. The Police Officers knew he had swallowed drugs and had called for and were waiting on EMS. If he had allowed them to put him in the car they would have taken him to the hospital. It took all of them to restrain him and they were just holding him down until EMS arrived.

    2. Much as I hate to appear to be defending this guy I also think he walks. Unless the jurors are too terrified of the backlash. The government should have cut the plea deal and declared victory. This guy isn’t innocent. But he may very well be not guilty.

      1. Chauvin isn’t innocent, but he’s not guilty of what they’re charging him with. They used the charges as a platform for ridiculous grand standing and performance art. Way back when, I speculated that they were overcharging in order to appease the mob and score political points, but they knew he was going to walk because they obviously have no case for murder. The mob wanted blood, so they gave them blood in the form lf murder charges. They should have taken the plea when they had a chance. I wonder if they just didn’t count on the fact that this particular mob won’t be appeased and isn’t going away this time.

        1. They are acting as if they want a new round of riots. They are actively supressing public airing of the defense case.

          But it will go before the jury. And unless the courts just railroad the guy, it looks like he has a really strong case, despite the shocking video.

          A jury looking at the actual facts might reach a very different conclusion than a public seeing only half the facts. It could be just happenstance, but it feels deliberate.

          But whether accidental or by design, this disconnect is dangerous. People are playing with fire, and it will objectively make the world a worse place.

          1. I see it as pretty similar to Kenosha’s issues. There too, the investigating agency—which was the WI state AG’s office, IIRC, because they yanked the case away the first day, but definitely not Kenosha PD—knew from the start that Jacob Blake was armed with a knife, had violated the protection order against him, and was trying to flee with a carload of kids. Did we hear any of that? No. What happened? Part of Kenosha burned down.

            Chaos was the point then. A rational, competent evil overlord would shut that shit down now that BadOrangeMan is gone, but Portland is still burning, isn’t it?

  4. This is indicative of reason starting to prevail–much like abandoning the calls to abolish the police in the wake of George Floyd’s murder.

    My understanding is that when they were afraid there would be a riot if they didn’t charge the cops with a serious enough offense, they dropped the third degree murder charge. And when they were afraid they might have overcharged him and there would be a riot if he was acquitted, they added a more reasonable charge.

    Justice shouldn’t be a popularity contest, but when that’s what it is, we might as well be reasonable about it.

    The real question should be about whether the drugs in George Floyd’s system introduce enough by way of reasonable doubt to acquit. They probably should have gone for involuntary manslaughter or negligent manslaughter–both of which appear to at least take the intent of the cop out of the equation.

    Whether Floyd the drugs in his system contributed to his death and whether the cop intended for him to die may both be open to the jury’s interpretation. If I’m the prosecutor, and I can point to the fact that the cop’s actions contributed to Floyd’s death as a baseline, and just use a charge that doesn’t make any judgements about the cop’s state of mind, that’s what I’d want to do.

    I maintain that a whole lot of people used George Floyd as an excuse to riot, but what plenty of them were really rioting about was the lockdowns and the pandemic and suddenly seeing the economy collapse. As I recall, something like 30 million Americans lost their jobs over a period of six weeks, which is unprecedented, and if it had been for George Floyd, all those younger, unemployed for service industry workers and idle stay at home college students would have found another excuse to riot.

    1. Reading something like “negligent manslaughter” makes my teeth itch. The mental state required for manslaughter—recklessness—is greater than mere negligence. Manslaughter is a different crime than negligent homicide for a good reason.

      Also, it’s hard to argue the cops were recklessly disregarding any risk to Floyd’s health by their actions, when they can easily show their own training told them to place Floyd in that position. Best the prosecution is going to be able to do, in theory, is show the cops took way too long to get EMS there to render assistance, and that such delay showed some criminally culpable mental state such as willfully hoping that Floyd would die, or deliberately indifferent to the risk that Floyd would die, etc…

      The crowd acting the fool really didn’t help. Cops aren’t going to let EMS walk into an incipient brawl.

  5. Don’t worry the jurors already said they are afraid to rule aquitta under any circumstance

    1. And combined with prosecutors loading up charges, he’s guaranteed to get convicted of something.

      Meanwhile those that looted and burned and rioted and caused a billion dollars in damages got away scot free. (except if they were white)

      Thanks all to left wing prosecutors and DAs, applying that whole social justice model to society. Gonna be a hell of a decade before the crash.

      1. As long as he is sentenced to anything less than immediate death, Minneapolis will burn.

        1. Glad Minneapolis isn’t my town.

          1. All towns in the future will be Minneapolis.

            1. You are wrong about that. I live in a city that is the same size as Minneapolis. We had 1/3 the violent crime that Minneapolis had before all this nonsense. Their crime rate keeps climbing and climbing. Ours has not. When BLM came to our town they were gassed two hours into their march for lighting a small paper fire. BLM was surrounded by law abiding citizens, then met with a few dozen heavily armed men that were there “to keep the peace and back law enforcement.
              The result, no graffiti, no increase in crime, no looting, no burned businesses. The construction crews cannot build homes fast enough here. The homes are sold before they are built. If BLM comes back, they will only find law abiding people that will support law enforcement. We won’t put up with their nonsense here, we don’t have to.

      2. “Thanks all to left wing prosecutors and DAs, applying that whole social justice model to society. Gonna be a hell of a decade before the crash.”

        Trumpanzees gone apeshit will replace democracy with mobocracy and SAVE us all!!! ALL HAIL the resurrected Trumptatorshit!

        Trump Saves! https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us-canada-49429661

        President Trump: ‘I am the chosen one’

        1. Fuck off, sarc.

        2. TDS is a terrible thing to witness.

          1. And Trump-worship will save us from TDS? What about PRO-Trump TDS; what will save us from THAT!??!?!

    2. I’d bet good money on a hung jury. I can very easily see at least some people taking a stand on reasonable doubt that it was an accident (by the medical report, the hold would not have killed if not for the other factors). However, I see others rightfully worried for their lives if they rule innocent.

  6. The deeper question is whether cops should be using potentially harmful or deadly physical force to bring in ANYONE accused of a minor crime that didn’t hurt anyone. This was about $20, which Floyd didn’t even actually get away with. The potential dangers of arresting someone by force are well known. The police should be allowed to say “forget it—it’s not worth the risk” and let someone go in these situations. Or maybe that should even be SOP in ALL situations where there hasn’t been any serious harm done. The “victim” and the police knew who Floyd was. They could have followed up later if necessary, in a less dangerous situation.

    1. Definitely a better alternative than how it actually played out.

      But, on the other hand, Floyd would then have probably died anyway, about 20 minutes later, at the wheel of his car and, possibly, run over a bunch of people in the street. No golden casket for a dead junkie. No murals. No grandiose speeches. We would have never seen his amateur porn tape. Just another statistic.

      Things could have been completely different.

      Food for thought, for sure.

      1. What is the #1 cause of death for Junkies?
        It is time.

    2. Sure, sure; Picking street fights with police and resisting arrest are surely the path to a civilized society.

    3. Floyd stuck a gun to a pregnant woman’s stomach. He was a known violent felon and should have still been in prison. Why should a known, violent felon be allowed to break that law at will? You may not mind, but many concerned non-ghetto citizens think that people should be arrested for committing crimes.
      The taxpayers pay for a criminal justice system. They should not have to put up with worthless, violent Junkies like Floyd constantly breaking the law.
      If you don’t mind people breaking the law I only have one thing to say. “Enjoy your ghetto”.

    4. Here’s the transcript of the 911 call.
      https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/28/us/minneapolis-george-floyd-911-calls/index.html
      It’s a little more complicated than a fake 20 dollar bill.

      Caller: Um someone comes our store and give us fake bills and we realize it before he left the store, and we ran back outside, they was sitting on their car. We tell them to give us their phone, put their (inaudible) thing back and everything and he was also drunk and everything and return to give us our cigarettes back and so he can, so he can go home but he doesn’t want to do that, and he’s sitting on his car cause he is awfully drunk and he’s not in control of himself.

      It appears that the store employees offered to let him leave if he returned the merchandise but he was too intoxicated to respond. If he was obviously “not in control of himself” it’s unlikely the cops would, or should, decide it’s not worth the risk and let him drive away. There are no simple answers here. The callers description seems consistent with the autopsy results showing potentially fatal amounts of drugs in his system.

      1. So take his car key.

    5. The car he was in was full of counterfeit money. If the police just let you go if you resist arrest everyone would resist arrest. Police officers don’t have a choice. They are required to use what ever force is necessary to restrain and transport someone after an arrest.

      1. “If the police just let you go if you resist arrest everyone would resist arrest.”

        Something that never seems to occur to many of the Libertarians here.

        Even back in ‘policing days of yore’, they still had ‘drunk tanks.’ And why? Because if you’re drunk enough to catch the po-po’s eye, (and you’re not in an area of the city where cops didn’t care) you’re drunk enough to hurt yourself or others. The difference was drunks back then didn’t resist getting carted off to those tanks. At least they usually didn’t resist twice. Plus, it was more informal and we didn’t have the entire panoply of for-profit criminal justice organizations like formal probation, piss tests, mandatory counseling meetings, GPS bracelets, etc…

        And it didn’t follow you. “Spent a night there in the can,” in San Francisco back then, who’ll know back in Bakersfield, when you show up on the job site? Now, they will.

        Why fight then? Especially when it just earned you a sap across the head, and now you’ve a great reason beyond the booze for your headache. If fighting now makes the police leave you alone, you’ll see (and have seen, if the 50 percent rise in murders in certain cities is a clue) a lot more fighting with cops. And cops deciding not to arrest people or get involved.

      2. “They are required to use what ever force is necessary to restrain and transport someone after an arrest.”

        And that’s insane, because it results in needless injuries and deaths from arresting people for petty offenses.

  7. Hey Sullum don’t jizz your undies yet. Chauvin still has to be convicted before they sentence him.

  8. We can only hope that the Obamas, Harris, Biden, and the other leftists get to meet a man like Floyd one day in person. The Obamas have been out of the ghetto so long, they have forgotten reality.
    In case that you didn’t notice, they moved as far east away from Chicago as they can get. Even they know that Climate Change is not the existential threat that they claim. Even the Obamas know that Chicago gang-bangers are a greater threat to them and their daughters than rising seas.

    1. Barack Obama was never in the ghetto.

  9. NONE of those four police officers “killed” George Floyd.

    He killed himself by his massive overdose of fantanyl and meth.

    I don’t care HOW many “opportunities” the jury have to convict.. IF they go on the evidence they will acquit. Floyd was a walking dead man before these officers ever “contacted” him as he sat in his own car. The autopsy and tox panel that is part of that report are public record. DOnt believe ME< go and look them up and read them. I have. Fantanyl was FOUR TIMES lethal leve IN HIS BLOOD. The meth was at least double lethal. THose chemicals were in huis system long before the cops ever knew he existed. Time to let Officer Chaivin go. Acquit.

    And if the jury convict because of their fear of more riots, then retry. Then try the jurors for their wrong verdict. We cannot allow a man to be convicted on the likelihood that rioters will do their thing again. Since when to ANtifa?BLM run this country?

  10. What a fucking farce. They are trying their damdest to convict this guy because of the court of public opinion. The drug addict and thug caused his own death with a heart condition compounded by an overdose of drugs.
    They just want whitey convicted anyway anyhow damn the evidence. And to add insult to injury the crackhead was made into some great person and martyr while he really is just another ghetto thug/addict pos!

  11. I am surprised that someone would write on this subject and have so much relevant information…. Yet seemingly lack any knowledge whatsoever of the facts that auger for the defense.

    We are in for a rough ride when this case is finished. People are being intentionally mislead as to the facts of this case, and they are being kept in the dark as to the conduct of the trial.

    The defense has a ton of evidence on their side of the table. If the jury doesn’t ignore all of that and simply go with the instinctive response to the video, there will be no explaining it. And this has to be by design.

    Police reform is our issue. Reason should not be participating in this setup. It will result in more violence and hatred, and it will move us further away from law enforcement reforms. You have to move from a place of honesty. The initial reporting on many of these cases has been wrong, and this one is no exception.

    If you keep telling the half-story and leave out the inconvenient facts, you are creating the problem, not solving it.

    1. Cyto, hasn’t your point:

      You have to move from a place of honesty. The initial reporting on many of these cases has been wrong, and this one is no exception.

      If you keep telling the half-story and leave out the inconvenient facts, you are creating the problem, not solving it.

      Been the rule for Reason since Balko? I mean, look at Zuri Davis’s ‘reporting’ on criminal justice issues. Or Shackford’s cheerleading for bail reform in New York. Or the lack of follow through on the effects of de facto decriminalization of theft. Dishonesty is what they do here, now. It makes me question Balko’s research more than I have, honestly.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.