George Floyd Protests

13435373940

Comments

  • mrussel1mrussel1 Posts: 26,219
    mickeyrat said:
    mrussel1 said:
    mrussel1 said:
    Does anyone believe for an instant that the three defendants would have been found guilty, let alone brought to trial, but for the video tape? It very well could have been three white guys’ word, one a former employee of the DA’s office, against a dead black guy’s. Please.
    Probably not,  but what evidence would there be for murder, meeting the legal standard?  I didn't follow the case closely but was there evidence to convict other than the footage?
    Not to my knowledge as it was a “self-defense” claim. The police didn’t arrest the suspects, render aid or conduct more than a cursory investigation. Seems like they took the “good ol’ boys’” word for it as to what had occurred. Put that before a jury without video evidence and they walk.
    Yeah they were definitely close to getting away with it.  Was there some sort of public outcry that led to a deeper investigation? 

    yes, the dumbfuck dad released the video to a radio stations social media.

    within days GBI took over the case and made arrests.

    but all along the family was crying foul....
    Morons
  • mickeyratmickeyrat Posts: 26,800
    here's  a times story from last year that helped get action on the case

    Two Weapons, a Chase, a Killing and No Charges https://nyti.ms/2ScrSD7



    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
  • Parksy said:
    A case where were it not for the video being leaked, the defendants might not have ever been charged. Add in a DA spoke with one of the defendants and directed them to destroy evidence and is now being charged with obstruction of justice. Never mind the police barely conducted an investigation and didn’t file any charges when it happened.

    Yea, race had nothing to do with justice being served. FFS.
    So the DA got nailed for destroying evidence too?  Home run.


    Race in the jury is not where the problem lies then…
    Maybe tell that to the guy who was released from prison after 46 years. It’s a societal problem and juries are made up from society, as are the cops, prosecutors, judges, etc.

    That a black man can be chased down and murdered in cold blood and but for a video tape being leaked and the family pressing for justice for 7 months, the perps might have gotten away with it. In 21st century ‘Murica. And people wonder about why there are riots?

    To the bold, problem solved then? Good to know.
    If racism was blatant w the jury then they would have said the citizens arrest was justifiable.  They didn't.
    To give this discussion a bit of easy flavour...   if you've ever seen the film A Time to Kill...  the closing argument of the defence (powerful scene) is actually quite relatable now a days.  

    I equate what Halifax is saying against what you're (Tempo) saying to this: 

    When faced with a remarkable amount of evidence and pressure, yes a mostly white jury convicted white men.  It's my opinion and I think Halifax's opinion that if the victim were white, and the crooks black, the threshold for evidence would be lower, the need for pressure would be non-existent, and........   and this one is both personal opinion and I believe a shared feeling amongst a lot of people.. this discussion wouldn't even be happening. 

    I found myself wondering what the verdict would be with this case and with the George Floyd case.  And what strikes me about that... is if the colour of the victim was different, I wouldn't.  Like if a black cop pressed his knee on a white dude for 9 minutes and killed him, there would be no question on the outcome.  If three black dudes chased down a white guy exercising in a neighbourhood, pulled  a shotgun on him and killed him... there would be no question.  Because of racism, which exists, it's a legit question, and that's pretty sad. And as someone said in this thread... and as the lawyer said in A Time to Kill... the eyes of justice are not blind because the eyes of justice are human eyes. 

    No disrespect meant towards anyone. 
    You said it much more eloquently than fax.  I understand what you are getting at.  I just went off what actually happened though.  It is shitty to say that there is a bias though when none was actually shown.

    If we keep saying What If's, then to me, as a society, we will never change.
  • mickeyratmickeyrat Posts: 26,800
    will put this here given its timeframe...


    Mostly white jury seated for trial in Daunte Wright's death
    By STEVE KARNOWSKI and AMY FORLITI
    8 mins ago

    MINNEAPOLIS (AP) — A mostly white jury was seated Friday for the trial of a suburban Minneapolis police officer who said she drew her handgun by mistake when she fatally shot Black motorist Daunte Wright following a traffic stop.

    Opening statements were to begin Wednesday in the case against Kim Potter, 49, who is charged with first- and second-degree manslaughter in the April 11 shooting in the suburb of Brooklyn Center.

    Potter, who is white, has said she meant to use her Taser on Wright after he tried to drive away from officers while they were trying to arrest him, but that she grabbed her handgun instead. Her body camera recorded the shooting.

    The last two jurors, both alternates, were quickly seated Friday morning.

    Nine of the first 12 jurors seated — the ones who will deliberate if no alternates are needed — are white, with one juror identifying as Black and two as Asian. The panel is evenly split between men and women. The two alternates are also white.

    The jury roughly matches the demographics of Hennepin County, which is about 74% white. Its makeup was closely watched, as legal experts have said that juries that are diverse by race, gender and economic background are necessary to minimize bias in the legal system.

    The jury is markedly less diverse than that chosen for the trial last spring of former Minneapolis Officer Derek Chauvin in George Floyd's death. In that case, the 12 who deliberated were split 50-50 between whites and people of color.

    Ted Sampsell-Jones, a professor at Mitchell Hamline School of Law in St. Paul, said Chauvin's jury was “mostly just luck of the draw.”

    He said racial and ethnic diversity matters in terms of the perceived legitimacy of the jury, but attitudes about police and policing are much more important for the case outcome.

    “It might be true in general that Black people are more distrustful of police than white people, but it isn’t true as to every individual,” Sampsell-Jones said. “Lots of young white people in Hennepin County are far more progressive and anti-cop than some older Black people, for example.”

    Alan Tuerkheimer, a Chicago-based jury consultant, said even a single juror of color can be enough to change the dynamics of deliberations by bringing more depth and another viewpoint to the process.

    Attorneys and the judge spent considerable time probing potential jurors for their views of protests against police brutality, which were frequent in Minneapolis even before George Floyd's death.

    Questionnaires asked about attitudes toward police, including whether officers should be second-guessed, whether they get the respect they deserve and whether jurors personally trust them.

    Juror No. 11, for example, said she “somewhat agreed” that officers should not be second-guessed.

    “I think sometimes you just react, and sometimes it might be a wrong reaction, but, you know, mistakes happen,” she said. “People make mistakes.”

    She was seated after saying she could set that view aside and consider evidence.

    Several jurors strongly disagreed that it's unreasonable to question officers' actions. Juror No. 19, the only Black person on the jury, wondered how Potter could show such a “lapse in judgment” with her experience.



    continues....



    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
  • mickeyratmickeyrat Posts: 26,800

     
    Chauvin pleads guilty to federal charge in Floyd’s death
    By AMY FORLITI
    4 mins ago

    ST. PAUL, Minn. (AP) — Former Minneapolis police Officer Derek Chauvin pleaded guilty Wednesday to a federal charge of violating George Floyd’s civil rights, admitting for the first time that he kept his knee on Floyd’s neck — even after he became unresponsive — resulting in the Black man’s death.

    Chauvin, who is white, was convicted this spring of state murder and manslaughter charges in Floyd's May 25, 2020, death, and was sentenced to 22 1/2 years.

    In his federal plea Wednesday, Chauvin admitted he willfully deprived Floyd of his right to be free from unreasonable seizure, including unreasonable force by a police officer, by kneeling on Floyd's neck even though he was handcuffed and not resisting. A second federal count in Floyd’s death was dismissed, but Chauvin pleaded guilty to another count in an unrelated 2017 case.

    Chauvin appeared in person for the change of plea hearing in an orange short-sleeve prison shirt and was led into and out of the court in handcuffs. He said “Guilty, your honor” to confirm his pleas, and acknowledged that he committed the acts alleged.

    Chauvin could have faced life in prison on the federal count, one possible incentive for him to avoid trial. Under the plea agreement, both sides agreed Chauvin should face a sentence ranging from 20 to 25 years, with prosecutors saying they would seek 25. The final sentence will be up to U.S. District Judge Paul Magnuson, but Chauvin is likely to face more time behind bars than he would on the state charges alone.

    Through a combination of good behavior and parole, Chauvin's state sentence is likely to amount to 15 years behind bars. A federal sentence would run at the same time, and good behavior also can reduce time — but inmates still typically serve about 85% of their sentences.

    That means if Chauvin gets the 25 years prosecutors want, he would likely spend 21 years and three months in prison — or a little more than six years beyond his state sentence.

    Three other former officers — Thomas Lane, J. Kueng and Tou Thao — were indicted on federal charges alongside Chauvin.

    Floyd’s arrest and death, which a bystander captured on cellphone video, sparked mass protests nationwide calling for an end to racial inequality and police mistreatment of Black people.

    Chauvin also pleaded guilty to violating the rights of a 14-year-old boy during a 2017 arrest in which he held the boy by the throat, hit him in the head with a flashlight and held his knee on the boy’s neck and upper back while he was prone, handcuffed and not resisting.

    That was one of several cases mentioned in state court filings that prosecutors said showed Chauvin used neck or head and upper body restraints seven times dating back to 2014, including four times state prosecutors said they went beyond the point force was needed.

    Several members of Floyd's family were present Wednesday, as was the teenager in the 2017 arrest. As they left the courtroom, Floyd's brother Philonise said to the teen: “It’s a good day for justice.”

    Nine people came to support Chauvin, including family members. He waved and smiled at them as he entered and left the courtroom.

    George Floyd's nephew, Brandon Williams, afterward called Chauvin a “monster” who should have been arrested in 2017.

    “Had he been held accountable for what he did in 2017 to that minor, George Floyd would still be here,” Williams said. "Today he had a chance to blow kisses and give air hugs to his family. We can’t do that.”

    An attorney for Floyd's family, Jeff Storms, said they planned to head to Minneapolis later Wednesday to support the family of Daunte Wright, a 20-year-old Black man who was fatally shot in a traffic stop during Chauvin's state trial. The police officer in that case, Kim Potter, is on trial on manslaughter charges.

    To bring federal charges in deaths involving police, prosecutors must believe an officer acted under the “color of law,” or government authority, and willfully deprived someone of their constitutional rights. It's a high legal standard, and an accident, bad judgment or negligence aren't enough. Prosecutors have to prove the officer knew what he was doing was wrong in that moment but did it anyway.

    Chauvin admitted that he knew what he did to Floyd was wrong and he had a “callous and wanton disregard” for Floyd’s life, the plea agreement said. It also said Chauvin “was aware that Mr. Floyd not only stopped resisting, but also stopped talking, stopped moving, stopped breathing, and lost consciousness and a pulse.”

    According to evidence in the state case against Chauvin, Kueng and Lane helped restrain the 46-year-old Floyd as he was on the ground — Kueng knelt on Floyd’s back and Lane held down Floyd’s legs. Thao held back bystanders and kept them from intervening during the 9 1/2-minute restraint.

    All four former officers were charged broadly in federal court with depriving Floyd of his rights while acting under government authority.

    The other three former officers are still expected to go to trial on federal charges in January, and they face state trial on aiding and abetting counts in March.

    ___

    This story has been corrected throughout to show that Chauvin plea in Floyd's death was to a single charge, with a second count dismissed.

    ___

    Find AP’s full coverage of the death of George Floyd at: https://apnews.com/hub/death-of-george-floyd


    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
  • mickeyratmickeyrat Posts: 26,800
     
    GUILTY OF MANSLAUGHTER




    Kim Potter guilty of manslaughter in Daunte Wright's death
    By AMY FORLITI and SCOTT BAUER
    5 mins ago

    MINNEAPOLIS (AP) — A suburban Minneapolis police officer who said she confused her handgun for her Taser was convicted of manslaughter Thursday in the death of Daunte Wright, prompting tears from the young Black man’s parents and a jubilant celebration by supporters outside the courthouse who chanted “Guilty, guilty, guilty!”

    The mostly white jury deliberated for about 27 hours over four days before finding former Brooklyn Center Officer Kim Potter guilty of first-degree and second-degree manslaughter. Potter, 49, faces about seven years in prison under the state’s sentencing guidelines, but prosecutors said they would seek a longer term.

    Judge Regina Chu ordered Potter taken into custody and held without bail pending sentencing on Feb. 18. Potter had been free on $100,000 bond posted the day last April that she was charged, which was three days after she killed Wright and a day after she quit the police force.

    As she was led away in handcuffs, a Potter family member in the courtroom shouted “Love you, Kim!” Potter’s attorneys left the courthouse without commenting and didn’t immediately respond to phone messages or emails.

    It was the second high-profile conviction of a police officer won this year by a team led by Attorney General Keith Ellison, including some of the same attorneys who helped convict Derek Chauvin in George Floyd’s death in the very same courtroom just eight months earlier.

    Wright was killed while that trial was happening not far away, and it set off a wave of angry protests outside the police station in Brooklyn Center, where demonstrators demanding “Justice for Daunte” clashed with officers in riot gear for several nights.

    Outside the courthouse Thursday, dozens of people who had gathered erupted in cheers, hugs and tears of joy as the verdicts were read. A New Orleans-style jazz band played “When the Saints Go Marching In.” Two men jumped up and down holding one another’s shoulders, and then other people began jumping up and down and chanting “Guilty, guilty, guilty!”

    They chanted “Say his name! Daunte Wright!” Some held yellow signs that said “guilty” in large block letters.

    Potter, who testified that she “didn’t want to hurt anybody,” looked down without any visible reaction when the verdicts were read. As Chu thanked the jury, Potter made the sign of the cross.

    Potter’s attorneys argued that she should be allowed to remain free until she’s sentenced, saying she wasn’t going to commit another crime or go anywhere.

    “It is the Christmas holiday season,” Potter attorney Paul Engh argued. “She’s a devoted Catholic, no less, and there is no point to incarcerate her at this point in time.”

    Chu rejected their arguments, though, saying she “cannot treat this case any differently than any other case.”

    Though Potter showed no visible emotion in court as the verdicts were read, she was photographed smiling in a mug shot taken later as she was processed at a women’s prison near Minneapolis.

    After Potter was led from the courtroom, prosecutor Erin Eldridge exchanged a long hug with a tearful Katie Bryant, Wright’s mother and a frequent presence at the trial, and with Wright’s father. Ellison also exchanged hugs with the parents.

    Outside the courthouse afterward, Ellison said the verdict brought a measure of accountability for Potter but fell short of justice.

    “Justice would be restoring Daunte to life and making the Wright family whole again," Ellison said. "Justice is beyond the reach that we have in this life for Daunte. But accountability is an important step, a critical necessary step on the road to justice for us all.”

    Ellison said he felt sympathy for Potter, who has gone from being an “esteemed member of the community” to being convicted of a serious crime.

    Wright’s mother hugged Ellison and said the verdicts triggered “every single emotion that you could imagine.”

    “Today we have gotten accountability and that’s what we’ve been asking for from the beginning,” Katie Bryant said, crediting supporters for keeping up pressure.

    “We love you, we appreciate you, and honestly, we could not have done it without you,” she said.

    The time-stamps on the verdicts showed that jurors agreed on the second count on Tuesday, before they asked the judge that afternoon what to do if they were having difficulty agreeing. The guilty verdict on the more serious first-degree count was reached at 11:40 a.m. Thursday.

    Potter, who is white, shot and killed the 20-year-old Wright during an April 11 traffic stop in Brooklyn Center as she and other officers were trying to arrest him on an outstanding warrant for a weapons possession charge. The shooting happened at a time of high tension in the area, with Chauvin standing trial in nearby Minneapolis for Floyd's death.

    Jurors saw video of the shooting from police body cameras and dashcams. As Wright pulled away while another officer attempted to handcuff him, Potter repeatedly said she would tase him, but instead shot him once in his chest with her gun, which was in her hand.

    “(Expletive)! I just shot him. ... I grabbed the wrong (expletive) gun,” Potter said on video shown to the jury. Moments later, she said: “I’m going to go to prison.”

    During her sometimes tearful testimony, Potter told jurors that she was “sorry it happened.” She said the traffic stop “just went chaotic."

    The maximum prison sentence for first-degree manslaughter is 15 years. Minnesota law sentences defendants only on their most serious conviction when multiple counts involve the same act and the same victim, and state guidelines call for about seven years on that charge.

    Prosecutors have said they would seek to prove aggravating factors that merit what’s called an upward departure from sentencing guidelines. In Potter’s case, they alleged that her actions were a danger to others, including her fellow officers, to Wright’s passenger and to the couple whose car was struck by Wright’s after the shooting. They also alleged she abused her authority as a police officer.

    Potter's attorneys argued that she made a tragic mistake, but that she also would have been justified in using deadly force because of the possibility that Potter's fellow officer, then-Sgt. Mychal Johnson, was at risk of being dragged if Wright had driven away from the traffic stop.

    Potter testified that she decided to act after seeing a look of fear on Johnson's face. But Eldridge pointed out to jurors that for much of the interaction, Potter was behind a third officer she was training and that Johnson didn’t come into her camera’s view until after the shot was fired — and then it showed the top of his head as he backed away.

    “Sgt. Johnson was clearly not afraid of being dragged,” Eldridge said. “He never said he was scared. He didn’t say it then, and he didn’t testify to it in court.”

    Eldridge also noted an inconsistency in Potter's testimony, saying that when she gave an interview to a psychologist working for the defense team, she told him she didn’t know why she used her Taser. Potter told the jury she didn’t recall saying that.

    First-degree manslaughter required prosecutors to prove that Potter caused Wright’s death while committing a misdemeanor — in her case, the reckless handling of a firearm. The second-degree charge required them to prove that she caused Wright's death by “culpable negligence.”

    ___

    Bauer reported from Madison, Wisconsin. Associated Press writers Mohamed Ibrahim in Minneapolis and Kathleen Foody in Chicago contributed to this report.

    ___

    Find the AP’s full coverage of the Daunte Wright case: https://apnews.com/hub/death-of-daunte-wright

    ___

    This story has been corrected to delete a reference to Potter pulling out her gun after she shouted a Taser warning. Body camera video shows her gun was already in her hand at the time.


    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
  • mace1229mace1229 Posts: 7,586
    I have mixed emotions with that. It was clearly an accident, but also her actions resulted in the death of someone else so there needed to be consequences. 7 years seems like a lot though. 
  • DewieCoxDewieCox Posts: 11,340
    mace1229 said:
    I have mixed emotions with that. It was clearly an accident, but also her actions resulted in the death of someone else so there needed to be consequences. 7 years seems like a lot though. 
    7 years isn’t enough. She ended a dude. When does negligence become intent?
  • DewieCox said:
    mace1229 said:
    I have mixed emotions with that. It was clearly an accident, but also her actions resulted in the death of someone else so there needed to be consequences. 7 years seems like a lot though. 
    7 years isn’t enough. She ended a dude. When does negligence become intent?
    Never, perhaps a dictionary may help you understand the obvious. 
  • mrussel1mrussel1 Posts: 26,219
    mace1229 said:
    I have mixed emotions with that. It was clearly an accident, but also her actions resulted in the death of someone else so there needed to be consequences. 7 years seems like a lot though. 
    She won't do 7. Maybe half of that. Mistaking a gun for a taser is absolutely criminally negligent.  I buy that it's negligent since she only fired once.
  • mace1229mace1229 Posts: 7,586
    mrussel1 said:
    mace1229 said:
    I have mixed emotions with that. It was clearly an accident, but also her actions resulted in the death of someone else so there needed to be consequences. 7 years seems like a lot though. 
    She won't do 7. Maybe half of that. Mistaking a gun for a taser is absolutely criminally negligent.  I buy that it's negligent since she only fired once.
    I agree on criminal negligence. Just 7 years seems like a lot to me for something that was an accident (an accident  without illegal activity, drag racing or drunk driving would be different). Watched my first episode of Court Cam this morning and a guy with a double homicide got 10 years. So 7 years for that seems like a lot.
  • DewieCoxDewieCox Posts: 11,340
    edited December 2021
    DewieCox said:
    mace1229 said:
    I have mixed emotions with that. It was clearly an accident, but also her actions resulted in the death of someone else so there needed to be consequences. 7 years seems like a lot though. 
    7 years isn’t enough. She ended a dude. When does negligence become intent?
    Never, perhaps a dictionary may help you understand the obvious. 
    “negligence” doesn’t completely absolve her of personal responsibility for her lack of preparedness and it seems like there would be a line where willingness to be underprepared turns into acceptance of the consequences 
    Post edited by DewieCox on
  • mickeyratmickeyrat Posts: 26,800
    edited December 2021
    as the training officer she had multiple opportunities  for a different  outcome. starting  with stopping him in the first place. expired tags during height of shut down.... 

    AND the dept shares in this. that trainee had been with at least 2 other depts as a trainee before that one.. 
    Post edited by mickeyrat on
    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
  • mickeyrat said:
    as the training officer she had multiple opportunities  for a different  outcome. starting  with stopping him in the first place. expired tags during height of shut down.... 

    AND the dept shares in this. that trainee had been with at least 2 other depts as a trainee before that one.. 
    This is hindsight though.  They/she/department had gone through thousands of stops without incident.  

    If you think that the department should change it's policing ways then you won't get an argument from me.
  • DewieCox said:
    DewieCox said:
    mace1229 said:
    I have mixed emotions with that. It was clearly an accident, but also her actions resulted in the death of someone else so there needed to be consequences. 7 years seems like a lot though. 
    7 years isn’t enough. She ended a dude. When does negligence become intent?
    Never, perhaps a dictionary may help you understand the obvious. 
    “negligence” doesn’t completely absolve her of personal responsibility for her lack of preparedness and it seems like there would be a line where willingness to be underprepared turns into acceptance of the consequences 
    None of that equals intent though.
  • She may set a precedent now.  All cops aren't getting the immunity that they used to.  Do I think she was a bad person, no.  She made a grave error though.

    Does a doctor suffer the same consequences if they screw up and kill someone?  I never hear about a doctor going to trial for killing a patient.  I know they have big insurances for screw ups.
  • mickeyratmickeyrat Posts: 26,800
    She may set a precedent now.  All cops aren't getting the immunity that they used to.  Do I think she was a bad person, no.  She made a grave error though.

    Does a doctor suffer the same consequences if they screw up and kill someone?  I never hear about a doctor going to trial for killing a patient.  I know they have big insurances for screw ups.
    special case but here you go.....



    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
  • mickeyratmickeyrat Posts: 26,800
    mickeyrat said:
    as the training officer she had multiple opportunities  for a different  outcome. starting  with stopping him in the first place. expired tags during height of shut down.... 

    AND the dept shares in this. that trainee had been with at least 2 other depts as a trainee before that one.. 
    This is hindsight though.  They/she/department had gone through thousands of stops without incident.  

    If you think that the department should change it's policing ways then you won't get an argument from me.
    so she stated she wouldnt correct  a trainee midstop to avoid embarrassing  that officer. the deliberated about arresting him, ample oportunity to go over how that should go. cant recall if that was discussed.

    trainee pulled him out, left the door open, tried to cuff at that door. 2 mistakes directly  leading to the shooting, she could have directed the arrest from start to finish being the trainer and superior officer. but no, cant let this trainee lose face. trainee on at least his third dept as a trainee.....
    the chief who resigned the same day as her backed her actions totally.

    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
  • mickeyrat said:
    She may set a precedent now.  All cops aren't getting the immunity that they used to.  Do I think she was a bad person, no.  She made a grave error though.

    Does a doctor suffer the same consequences if they screw up and kill someone?  I never hear about a doctor going to trial for killing a patient.  I know they have big insurances for screw ups.
    special case but here you go.....



    That is definitely a unique case.  I have heard of Nurses doing the same in killing patients.  That is flat out murder though.  With all the cops coming up on charges, does a doctor when he screws up, get brought up on murder charges?
  • mickeyratmickeyrat Posts: 26,800
    mickeyrat said:
    She may set a precedent now.  All cops aren't getting the immunity that they used to.  Do I think she was a bad person, no.  She made a grave error though.

    Does a doctor suffer the same consequences if they screw up and kill someone?  I never hear about a doctor going to trial for killing a patient.  I know they have big insurances for screw ups.
    special case but here you go.....



    That is definitely a unique case.  I have heard of Nurses doing the same in killing patients.  That is flat out murder though.  With all the cops coming up on charges, does a doctor when he screws up, get brought up on murder charges?

    unless its egregious.  like drunk or high surgery, usually civil suit...
    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
  • mickeyrat said:
    mickeyrat said:
    She may set a precedent now.  All cops aren't getting the immunity that they used to.  Do I think she was a bad person, no.  She made a grave error though.

    Does a doctor suffer the same consequences if they screw up and kill someone?  I never hear about a doctor going to trial for killing a patient.  I know they have big insurances for screw ups.
    special case but here you go.....



    That is definitely a unique case.  I have heard of Nurses doing the same in killing patients.  That is flat out murder though.  With all the cops coming up on charges, does a doctor when he screws up, get brought up on murder charges?

    unless its egregious.  like drunk or high surgery, usually civil suit...
    Made me curious.  I know they get sued for malpractice but never heard of screwing up so bad that they get convicted.  Doctors also seem to have a "do no wrong" clause.

    I see a time in the future where you aren't allowed to make a mistake.  That will be good and bad...
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 33,233
    mickeyrat said:
    mickeyrat said:
    She may set a precedent now.  All cops aren't getting the immunity that they used to.  Do I think she was a bad person, no.  She made a grave error though.

    Does a doctor suffer the same consequences if they screw up and kill someone?  I never hear about a doctor going to trial for killing a patient.  I know they have big insurances for screw ups.
    special case but here you go.....



    That is definitely a unique case.  I have heard of Nurses doing the same in killing patients.  That is flat out murder though.  With all the cops coming up on charges, does a doctor when he screws up, get brought up on murder charges?

    unless its egregious.  like drunk or high surgery, usually civil suit...
    Made me curious.  I know they get sued for malpractice but never heard of screwing up so bad that they get convicted.  Doctors also seem to have a "do no wrong" clause.

    I see a time in the future where you aren't allowed to make a mistake.  That will be good and bad...
    I don't see that happening in the medical field. You don't want people not going to medical school for fear of going to jail eventually. 
    I think I'll move to Australia


  • nicknyr15nicknyr15 Posts: 6,490
    mickeyrat said:
    mickeyrat said:
    She may set a precedent now.  All cops aren't getting the immunity that they used to.  Do I think she was a bad person, no.  She made a grave error though.

    Does a doctor suffer the same consequences if they screw up and kill someone?  I never hear about a doctor going to trial for killing a patient.  I know they have big insurances for screw ups.
    special case but here you go.....



    That is definitely a unique case.  I have heard of Nurses doing the same in killing patients.  That is flat out murder though.  With all the cops coming up on charges, does a doctor when he screws up, get brought up on murder charges?

    unless its egregious.  like drunk or high surgery, usually civil suit...
    Made me curious.  I know they get sued for malpractice but never heard of screwing up so bad that they get convicted.  Doctors also seem to have a "do no wrong" clause.

    I see a time in the future where you aren't allowed to make a mistake.  That will be good and bad...
    I don't see that happening in the medical field. You don't want people not going to medical school for fear of going to jail eventually. 
    Can’t this be applied to policing as well? 
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 33,233
    nicknyr15 said:
    mickeyrat said:
    mickeyrat said:
    She may set a precedent now.  All cops aren't getting the immunity that they used to.  Do I think she was a bad person, no.  She made a grave error though.

    Does a doctor suffer the same consequences if they screw up and kill someone?  I never hear about a doctor going to trial for killing a patient.  I know they have big insurances for screw ups.
    special case but here you go.....



    That is definitely a unique case.  I have heard of Nurses doing the same in killing patients.  That is flat out murder though.  With all the cops coming up on charges, does a doctor when he screws up, get brought up on murder charges?

    unless its egregious.  like drunk or high surgery, usually civil suit...
    Made me curious.  I know they get sued for malpractice but never heard of screwing up so bad that they get convicted.  Doctors also seem to have a "do no wrong" clause.

    I see a time in the future where you aren't allowed to make a mistake.  That will be good and bad...
    I don't see that happening in the medical field. You don't want people not going to medical school for fear of going to jail eventually. 
    Can’t this be applied to policing as well? 
    different fields, different considerations. when doctors start stabbing people with scalpels in the neck claiming they thought it would assist in the surgery they were performing, then maybe we can talk. 
    I think I'll move to Australia


  • nicknyr15nicknyr15 Posts: 6,490
    nicknyr15 said:
    mickeyrat said:
    mickeyrat said:
    She may set a precedent now.  All cops aren't getting the immunity that they used to.  Do I think she was a bad person, no.  She made a grave error though.

    Does a doctor suffer the same consequences if they screw up and kill someone?  I never hear about a doctor going to trial for killing a patient.  I know they have big insurances for screw ups.
    special case but here you go.....



    That is definitely a unique case.  I have heard of Nurses doing the same in killing patients.  That is flat out murder though.  With all the cops coming up on charges, does a doctor when he screws up, get brought up on murder charges?

    unless its egregious.  like drunk or high surgery, usually civil suit...
    Made me curious.  I know they get sued for malpractice but never heard of screwing up so bad that they get convicted.  Doctors also seem to have a "do no wrong" clause.

    I see a time in the future where you aren't allowed to make a mistake.  That will be good and bad...
    I don't see that happening in the medical field. You don't want people not going to medical school for fear of going to jail eventually. 
    Can’t this be applied to policing as well? 
    different fields, different considerations. when doctors start stabbing people with scalpels in the neck claiming they thought it would assist in the surgery they were performing, then maybe we can talk. 
    Lol. Ok. 
  • nicknyr15 said:
    mickeyrat said:
    mickeyrat said:
    She may set a precedent now.  All cops aren't getting the immunity that they used to.  Do I think she was a bad person, no.  She made a grave error though.

    Does a doctor suffer the same consequences if they screw up and kill someone?  I never hear about a doctor going to trial for killing a patient.  I know they have big insurances for screw ups.
    special case but here you go.....



    That is definitely a unique case.  I have heard of Nurses doing the same in killing patients.  That is flat out murder though.  With all the cops coming up on charges, does a doctor when he screws up, get brought up on murder charges?

    unless its egregious.  like drunk or high surgery, usually civil suit...
    Made me curious.  I know they get sued for malpractice but never heard of screwing up so bad that they get convicted.  Doctors also seem to have a "do no wrong" clause.

    I see a time in the future where you aren't allowed to make a mistake.  That will be good and bad...
    I don't see that happening in the medical field. You don't want people not going to medical school for fear of going to jail eventually. 
    Can’t this be applied to policing as well? 
    different fields, different considerations. when doctors start stabbing people with scalpels in the neck claiming they thought it would assist in the surgery they were performing, then maybe we can talk. 
    Like I mentioned above, they can be sued for making an improper judgment call, they call it Malpractice though.
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 33,233
    nicknyr15 said:
    mickeyrat said:
    mickeyrat said:
    She may set a precedent now.  All cops aren't getting the immunity that they used to.  Do I think she was a bad person, no.  She made a grave error though.

    Does a doctor suffer the same consequences if they screw up and kill someone?  I never hear about a doctor going to trial for killing a patient.  I know they have big insurances for screw ups.
    special case but here you go.....



    That is definitely a unique case.  I have heard of Nurses doing the same in killing patients.  That is flat out murder though.  With all the cops coming up on charges, does a doctor when he screws up, get brought up on murder charges?

    unless its egregious.  like drunk or high surgery, usually civil suit...
    Made me curious.  I know they get sued for malpractice but never heard of screwing up so bad that they get convicted.  Doctors also seem to have a "do no wrong" clause.

    I see a time in the future where you aren't allowed to make a mistake.  That will be good and bad...
    I don't see that happening in the medical field. You don't want people not going to medical school for fear of going to jail eventually. 
    Can’t this be applied to policing as well? 
    different fields, different considerations. when doctors start stabbing people with scalpels in the neck claiming they thought it would assist in the surgery they were performing, then maybe we can talk. 
    Like I mentioned above, they can be sued for making an improper judgment call, they call it Malpractice though.
    yeah, but those are rare and have to be egregious errors. I don't see it coming to the "can't make an error" point for doctors. 
    I think I'll move to Australia


  • nicknyr15 said:
    mickeyrat said:
    mickeyrat said:
    She may set a precedent now.  All cops aren't getting the immunity that they used to.  Do I think she was a bad person, no.  She made a grave error though.

    Does a doctor suffer the same consequences if they screw up and kill someone?  I never hear about a doctor going to trial for killing a patient.  I know they have big insurances for screw ups.
    special case but here you go.....



    That is definitely a unique case.  I have heard of Nurses doing the same in killing patients.  That is flat out murder though.  With all the cops coming up on charges, does a doctor when he screws up, get brought up on murder charges?

    unless its egregious.  like drunk or high surgery, usually civil suit...
    Made me curious.  I know they get sued for malpractice but never heard of screwing up so bad that they get convicted.  Doctors also seem to have a "do no wrong" clause.

    I see a time in the future where you aren't allowed to make a mistake.  That will be good and bad...
    I don't see that happening in the medical field. You don't want people not going to medical school for fear of going to jail eventually. 
    Can’t this be applied to policing as well? 
    different fields, different considerations. when doctors start stabbing people with scalpels in the neck claiming they thought it would assist in the surgery they were performing, then maybe we can talk. 
    Like I mentioned above, they can be sued for making an improper judgment call, they call it Malpractice though.
    yeah, but those are rare and have to be egregious errors. I don't see it coming to the "can't make an error" point for doctors. 
    Wanted to ask a question.  Would be a crazy world if it did go that way.
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 33,233
    nicknyr15 said:
    mickeyrat said:
    mickeyrat said:
    She may set a precedent now.  All cops aren't getting the immunity that they used to.  Do I think she was a bad person, no.  She made a grave error though.

    Does a doctor suffer the same consequences if they screw up and kill someone?  I never hear about a doctor going to trial for killing a patient.  I know they have big insurances for screw ups.
    special case but here you go.....



    That is definitely a unique case.  I have heard of Nurses doing the same in killing patients.  That is flat out murder though.  With all the cops coming up on charges, does a doctor when he screws up, get brought up on murder charges?

    unless its egregious.  like drunk or high surgery, usually civil suit...
    Made me curious.  I know they get sued for malpractice but never heard of screwing up so bad that they get convicted.  Doctors also seem to have a "do no wrong" clause.

    I see a time in the future where you aren't allowed to make a mistake.  That will be good and bad...
    I don't see that happening in the medical field. You don't want people not going to medical school for fear of going to jail eventually. 
    Can’t this be applied to policing as well? 
    different fields, different considerations. when doctors start stabbing people with scalpels in the neck claiming they thought it would assist in the surgery they were performing, then maybe we can talk. 
    Like I mentioned above, they can be sued for making an improper judgment call, they call it Malpractice though.
    yeah, but those are rare and have to be egregious errors. I don't see it coming to the "can't make an error" point for doctors. 
    Wanted to ask a question.  Would be a crazy world if it did go that way.
    yeah, it would. 
    I think I'll move to Australia


  • DewieCoxDewieCox Posts: 11,340
    DewieCox said:
    DewieCox said:
    mace1229 said:
    I have mixed emotions with that. It was clearly an accident, but also her actions resulted in the death of someone else so there needed to be consequences. 7 years seems like a lot though. 
    7 years isn’t enough. She ended a dude. When does negligence become intent?
    Never, perhaps a dictionary may help you understand the obvious. 
    “negligence” doesn’t completely absolve her of personal responsibility for her lack of preparedness and it seems like there would be a line where willingness to be underprepared turns into acceptance of the consequences 
    None of that equals intent though.
    Not intent to murder, but intent to not be good enough at your job to avoid what almost every cop has called a virtually unmakeable mistake.
Sign In or Register to comment.