Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Don’t Rebuild Those Burned-Out Businesses Just Yet
Over at PJ Media today, I offer the recommendation that people hold off on rebuilding any burned-out business in Minneapolis and elsewhere. Body camera footage from two of the officers charged in George Floyd’s death has been leaked to the Daily Mail, and it does not inspire confidence in the prosecutors’ case. A month ago, writing at National Review Online, I speculated on why Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison had not released the body camera footage to the public. “Could it be,” I asked, “that it has been withheld because it does not bolster the case against the defendants?”
With the leak of the surreptitiously recorded video copies, this appears this is the case. The videos show Floyd’s resistance to being put in a police car after being arrested, and they reveal how many times Floyd claimed he could not breathe despite clear evidence that he could. “The criminal charges in this case,” I write in the PJ Media column, “stem from the officers’ inability to divine when Floyd’s feigned distress, including the earlier claims he could not breathe, became real. Even if they had realized Floyd had suffered a heart attack and begun CPR immediately, there will be a divergence of medical opinions as to whether Floyd could have survived.”
Floyd’s autopsy documents the presence of both fentanyl and methamphetamine in his blood, either of which can cause a fatal arrhythmia even in a healthy person. For someone afflicted with heart disease as Floyd was, we can fairly assume the risks using these drugs is even greater.
I summarize my argument as follows:
So, the question for the judge or jury will be: Did Floyd die because the officers applied unlawful force, or was it because he, with a diseased heart and after consuming dangerous drugs, so vigorously resisted their use of lawful force? The current state of the evidence provides no clear answer, which translates to reasonable doubt and an acquittal.
As is often the case, the comments to the piece at PJ Media are less than edifying, but I look forward to reading the opinions of my fellow Ricochetti.
Published in Policing
Given that Minneapolis is apparently advising people to be prepared to surrender their valuables if threatened I probably wouldn’t have advised rebuilding there anyway.
The prosecutors were insane to go for murder here.
Manslaughter was a much easier target, but they wanted to bask in the mob’s adulation.
Too many people have already made up their minds. Sad.
Jack,
No, it destroys the case against the defendants and Ellison all but admitted it. Fasten your seat belts it’s going to be a bumpy ride.
Regards,
Jim
Just repeating what I posted in another thread, if you’re AG Keith Ellison, you may want the race issue as much of more than you want the convictions, so over-charging Chauvin above manslaughter, in order to them charge the other officers, can be seen as a win-win for him.
If Ellison gets a complaint/intimidated jury that is willing to look past the body cam video and convict on the charges the AG put forth, his image among progressaives soars at the state and national level. If the jury acquits, Ellison can play the race and victim cards, possibly even going as far as to back-channel doxx the evil jurors while acting like the leader of the outage mob as a new round of protests, rioting and looting occur.
About the only way Ellison ‘loses’ in terms of his reputation is if the jury convicts Chauvin of a far lesser charge, acquits the other officers and there are no riots in Minneapolis, and/or the local residents there turn on the Antifa types when they try to set off a new round of riots (something we did see a few people try to do during the late May protests).
As a piece of tendentious twaddle, the Daily Mail write-up accompanying the tape can’t be beat. “As his knee presses the life out of Floyd . . . “
It was clear from the first publicized video weeks ago that George Floyd was not murdered by the police. Four officers had multiple smartphones extended toward them, obviously recording the event in plain view (one immediatedly in front of Officer Chauvin), and the officers made no attempt to deter that recording or confiscate the phones.
It stretches belief that one police officer in the US would be comfortable murdering someone in broad daylight while being recorded. The idea that four officers would be so comfortable is ridiculous, even if the whole police department and city were utterly corrupt. A video on the Internet is not subject to local politics.
Thus, the only points of possible misconduct were (1) gross negligence in securing medical assistance and (2) use of physical force beyond what local regulations allow.
If the police officers were waiting on an ambulance and had him so positioned for his or their protection, then one might argue they made some misjudgment; but they would be innocent of gross negligence (or whatever the legal term might be).
That the autopsy found no damage to the neck suggests Chauvin’s weight was not applied there. Fellow officers made no forceful objections to his positioning, so I would guess it was permissible.
Prior to this week’s updates, I had assumed Chauvin’s knee near Floyd’s neck violated common codes of restraint because the police union representatives in New York had condemned Chauvin in an otherwise sensible defense of New York policing. I assumed those police officers knew something I didn’t while watching the first publicized video.
But only days ago I heard Ted Cruz reference Chauvin’s actions as inexcusable. He is usually a very calm and responsible analyst. So perhaps it is simply the case that the fictional narrative of abuse during this arrest is so ubiquitous and forcefully asserted that many good and intelligent people were overwhelmed by peer pressure, even to the point of doubting their own judgments.
Failure to prove cause of death, beyond a reasonable doubt, undermines both murder and manslaughter charges.
It is an erroneous evasion, in my view, to conclude that any homicide charge is warranted in these circumstances.
One of our number has suggested that Derek Chauvin used his knee to restrain (not “press the life out of”) George Floyd because Floyd said he “had COVID.” If he was concerned about coming into contact with Floyd’s germs, that would also explain why he kept his hands clear, and didn’t do a lot of First Aid stuff.
Quite apart from the nonsense, I have a serious question about why Chauvin didn’t seem to realize that the man under his knee was no longer resisting or even responding. His colleagues also seem a little disorganized to me and not as effective at communicating with Floyd or with each other as they might have been. Not racist, not violent, not terrible human beings, mind you!
This could be a training issue. It could also be that, given reports that Minneapolis P.D. was seriously undermanned at the time, one, two or all four officers were simply overworked. They sound and even look tired on the various videos. I’d worry about my guys if they looked like that, with or without a George Floyd Incident.
A practical question: Our guys are now being trained to shout “stop resisting! Stop resisting!” when involved in a kerfuffle with a member of the public. (You can hear the Minneapolis officers saying this to Floyd.)
I’m wondering whether it would help to have officers trained to loudly announce what they are doing when dealing with an intoxicated or otherwise impaired subject, especially when civilians are present. “Sir, we believe you are having some sort of medical event; rescue is on the way, we’re going to get you some medical attention sir.”
Jack:
“The videos show Floyd’s resistance to being put in a police car after being arrested, and they reveal how many times Floyd claimed he could not breathe despite clear evidence that he could. “The criminal charges in this case,” I write in the PJ Media column, “stem from the officers’ inability to divine when Floyd’s feigned distress, including the earlier claims he could not breathe, became real. Even if they had realized Floyd had suffered a heart attack and begun CPR immediately, there will be a divergence of medical opinions as to whether Floyd could have survived.”
Floyd’s autopsy documents the presence of both fentanyl and methamphetamine in his blood, either of which can cause a fatal arrhythmia even in a healthy person. For someone afflicted with heart disease as Floyd was, we can fairly assume the risks using these drugs is even greater.”
Best Analysis I have seen yet.
In my mind this video exonerates the police for both murder and manslaughter. There is no guilt here beyond a reasonable doubt. There are many reasonable doubts about Floyd’s behavior starting with the fact that he appeared to be higher than a kite and was all over the place. I agree Floyd was complaining perhaps about his breathing, but he was complaining principally about many other things -like getting shot- in a very loud and clear voice – not a voice of a person who can’t breathe and is about to die of a heart attack.
As I point out in an article that has been submitted and will soon be posted, the officers in question had called for an ambulance and asked that it be sent as quickly as possible. They were waiting for that ambulance. They were also exhausted and probably expected that if they let Floyd sit up they would be back in a fight to control him. The man was 6’4″ in height and weighed 220 pounds, and he put up a terrific fight.
As for Keith Ellison, I think that he loses no matter what. Remember: he egged on the rioters. Those rioters damaged a great many buildings and did $400 million in damage. Minnesota almost went for Trump in 2016. It will do so in 2020. Ellison will never win another state-wide office.
Given the evidence, even manslaughter will be difficult to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. By the time Floyd’s distress became apparent, the officers had already requested an ambulance for him. Yes, they should have initiated CPR on him before medics arrived, but their failure to do so doesn’t amount to manslaughter, much less murder. And even if they had, expect medical testimony that it wouldn’t have saved him.
“Destroy” may be too strong, but the videos don’t help Ellison’s case in the least.
Yes, it was almost comical to read the Mail’s version.
Exactly.
From your keyboard to God’s ears!
An interesting turn of events. Have we reached a point where someone in a police department has to release a video because a prosecutor cannot be trusted? The answer appears to be yes, and this issue is probably not confined to Minnesota.
It is not unusual for a suspect to feign an injury after resisting arrest. If the fight plan doesn’t work in the “Fight or Flee” plan then the hope is that the trip to the ER might be an opportunity to try the flee plan.
There would be no way that the officers would have known of Floyd’s previous health issues, and they would have no way to know what Floyd had ingested prior to his arrest.
Another possibility is that, with Floyd subdued and waiting for the ambulance, the officers were focused more on the angry crowd around them. It doesn’t seem to have been a massive mob — and this was before the national hysteria. But in that neighborhood it might not be uncommon for onlookers to interfere in arrests.
Jack, I agree with your analysis. Your choice of title for the post is sadly true. We are in for a long tumultuous ride.
I’ve said for weeks that the continued presence of plywood over business windows suggests the owners believe another round is possible.
Except, of course, for the boarded-up stores in the heart of the dense, upscale commercial district that was looted; some of those stores are never coming back.
Why would they come back? We’re seeing the Detroit-ization of Minneapolis, Chicago, St. Louis, and other cities, where those who can flee for the suburbs (or beyond), leaving a hollowed out husk of a city. Detroit is experiencing something of a renaissance now, thanks in part to a police chief (a former boss of mine at the LAPD) who refuses to bow to the mob. But look at what that city had to endure over the last 50 years.
It’s important to never assume that the detained is no longer dangerous. The officers were already operating outside of protocol by removing Floyd from the vehicle. Floyd was nonsensical and erratic, which is always bad because you cannot know for sure. Is Floyd really messed up, or is he faking it? Too many stories out there of officers believing a suspect has been subdued, then two seconds later he’s on his feet, cognizant, of clear mind and coming after their weapons.
I’m on the officer’s side here. Additional restraint wouldn’t have been required if Floyd stayed in the officer’s vehicle.
Floyd announced that he had Covid, which was confirmed in his autopsy. I’m torn on this one. Is it the officer’s responsibility to administer CPR, putting themselves at risk? They already called the ambulance. Floyd was also conscious for the majority of the time, as evidenced by his ability to speak. Officers have some basic medical training, but they’re not EMTs and based on Floyd’s behavior, it could be risky to assume he’s unconscious. We also need to remember that the officers asked what kind of drugs Floyd was on and he didn’t give them an answer. If he did, they may have been better prepared to deal with the situation. These are the worst types of calls to take because drugs can turn the entire situation inside out in a split second.
They could’ve given him CPR, I suppose. “Could have” is not the same as “should have.” I hope it’s clear, in my comments, that I’m not criticizing the officers, only wondering what lessons could be drawn from this event (if any) other than the one and only lesson anyone is any longer permitted to draw, namely that police officers are either racist (if white) or Uncle Toms (if not).
Since I—unlike my progressive friends—actually do want to make policing better and safer for all concerned, because black lives matter, I’m looking for concrete problems with measurable and attainable solutions.
This is yet another case study in why the prevention of actual, physical violence is so crucial. It’s not just about the preservation of life and property; it’s also about our collective ability to arrive at an accurate and useful description of reality.
Like so much of the truth about American policing, this should be good news: “Guess what, folks! A public servant named Derek Chauvin did not murder a citizen, George Floyd! Guess what? American police officers are not actually “hunting black men in the streets!” And guess what? Parents don’t have to have a special, extra conversation about cops with their black sons; they can just have the normal, ordinary conversations any other parent has!”
One would think this would be cause for at least some relief, if not actual rejoicing. However, the American people have been persuaded to make a huge moral investment in a very specific narrative. By “moral investment,” I mean not only that many have spent time protesting, marching, signing petitions, kneeling or applauding kneeling… because we believed that police are killing people “ based solely on the color of their skin,” as former Democratic Candidate Beto O’ Rourke put it.
Whole neighborhoods in American cities have been burned and looted, public buildings vandalized or destroyed, monuments to historical figures including, along with various Confederates soldiers, Columbus, Ulysses S. Grant, Abraham Lincoln and Frederick Douglas have been damaged or removed. Police officers have been injured and killed, and innocent fellow citizens have been deprived of their property, livelihoods or even lives over the past few months.
We the people have been asked to understand all of this as a response not merely to a single act (the death of George Floyd) but to an unconscionable epidemic of police violence driven by racism. What are we to think of those in politics, in the media, in our churches and neighborhoods, what are we to think of ourselves if the narrative isn’t true?
People whom we presumed to have access to the facts persuaded us that addressing racist police violence needed to be the nation’s highest priority, more important by far than, say, climate change. Indeed, the problem was so urgent, we were told, that measures put in place to combat the COVID pandemic even in hotspots, had to be suspended so that demonstrations (and riots) could take place. The fear of spreading disease that caused churches, synagogues and mosques to be closed, schools emptied, and businesses shuttered (often for good) could not be allowed to stand in the way of this and no other just cause.
It is likely that these widespread demonstrations and riots helped to spread the COVID virus. To accept that the George Floyd story (etc. etc.) was simply false is to realize that the “second wave” (with yet more economic damage, yet more anxiety and inconvenience, and yet more lives lost) could’ve been avoided or ameliorated.
In sum, the sacrifices have been too great. In particular, lives have been lost. Had David Dorn et al not died, and had the murder rates in New York, Chicago and Atlanta not risen and swept away little babies and young children…? But it has. And, paradoxically, the deaths of these small persons will harden rather than soften hearts and minds.
GrannyDude, I really like your #25 above. One quibble:
If you think that climate change is the nation’s highest priority, I think that you’ve been as misled on this issue as you were on the claims of racist police violence.
We have real, serious problems — family breakdown, economic difficulties, COVID, China, immigration, and others.
When should they have given him CPR?
It’s been decades since my last CPR training. My recollection is that you do not do CPR on someone whose heart is still beating. That gives a very small window for possible CPR on Mr. Floyd, and the EMTs were just about to arrive.
I don’t think climate change should be the nation’s highest priority—-but the people who do have been distracted by #BLM. An existential crisis (supposedly) has been shoved aside for one that is temporary and relatively insignificant, even if the most dire analysis of police and racism turned out to be true.
The only moment I can imagine giving him CPR would be after he went limp—assuming that they tried and failed to get a pulse. For all I know, he still had a pulse at that point…and I am persuaded that it wouldn’t have done much good. But then, it’s always a bit of Hail Mary pass anyway. The other question would be whether it would’ve helped to give him Narcan. (“Helped” in the sense of reversed the overdose, if it was an overdose, of opiods or, more cynically, “helped” in the sense that squirting Narcan up the poor guy’s nose would’ve made the video unusable as riot-fuel.