ImageImageImageImageImage

George Floyd (and aftermath): Part 2

Moderators: mpharris36, NoLayupRule, King of Canada, GONYK, K-DOT, Deeeez Knicks, Capn'O, Thugger HBC, j4remi, Jeff Van Gully, mrpoetryNmotion

User avatar
NoDopeOnSundays
Head Coach
Posts: 6,348
And1: 10,624
Joined: Nov 22, 2005
         

Re: George Floyd (and aftermath): Part 2 

Post#221 » by NoDopeOnSundays » Thu Sep 24, 2020 7:15 pm

HarthorneWingo wrote:
NoDopeOnSundays wrote:
frothbrain wrote:Cops will never, ever put their lives at risk over the lives of the perpetrators or even innocent bystanders.
No amount of public outcry will change that. So proposing some sort of non lethal seal team six training for cops across the country is just a fantasy, when even the best trained military units are trained around eliminating threats.

A more realistic goal would be decreasing the number of raids in the first place.



The only way to get them to think twice at this point is to hit their pockets. Cities should not pay for lawsuits anymore, that should come from their pension fund. You'd incentive the so called "good" cops to at least call out the ones breaking the rules because the bad apple in this case would ruin it for everyone. They don't care about anything other than themselves, I'm sure they'd care about their money getting hit.



Making the cops foot the bill would end up hurting the victims. Also, the police unions would buy them insurance.


The amount of victims would drop when the Cops actually have to think twice, currently they can just let the bullets fly without any repercussions. The only thing America cares about is money, so I'd guess the Police are the same way.

And close those loopholes you're talking about. There should be no way around them having to pay from their pension, cities should not foot the bill anymore.
User avatar
K-DOT
Forum Mod - Knicks
Forum Mod - Knicks
Posts: 13,423
And1: 18,921
Joined: Nov 25, 2016
         

Re: George Floyd (and aftermath): Part 2 

Post#222 » by K-DOT » Thu Sep 24, 2020 7:16 pm

frothbrain wrote:Cops will never, ever put their lives at risk over the lives of innocent bystanders

Makes sense

Only thing cops should put their lives at risk for is property, cause that's more important than black lives apparently.
BAF Lakers:

Darius Garland/Shabazz Napier
Killian Hayes/Tre Jones
Cam Johnson/Saddiq Bey
Onyeka Okongwu/Darius Bazley
Goga Bitadze/Bol Bol
Pointgod
RealGM
Posts: 10,388
And1: 10,107
Joined: Jun 28, 2014

Re: George Floyd (and aftermath): Part 2 

Post#223 » by Pointgod » Thu Sep 24, 2020 7:22 pm

HarthorneWingo wrote:
frothbrain wrote:
K-DOT wrote:It was not a drug house, but thank you for playing.



That's how it was written in the search warrant which was based off surveillance of the suspects.
So you can blame the surveillance team and judge for signing off on faulty information.
The cops executing the warrant and returning fire are not to blame though.


Unless there are other facts involved, frothbrain is right.

He probably piggybacked on my earlier comment to that effect.


So what do you think about charging the one officer for reckless endangerment for hitting the walls of Taylor’s neighbor’s house but not charging him for type of attempted manslaughter/murder? He essentially gets off because he missed. Let’s be honest the fix was in from the fact that the AG is a Republican acolyte of Mitch McConnell. Compare this to the charges that a Democratic AG brought against the cops in George Floyd’s murder?
Pointgod
RealGM
Posts: 10,388
And1: 10,107
Joined: Jun 28, 2014

Re: George Floyd (and aftermath): Part 2 

Post#224 » by Pointgod » Thu Sep 24, 2020 7:25 pm

3toheadmelo wrote:Riot until there is justice.


Protests and riots have worked over the summer. Right now riots will just play into the hands of the pig in the Whitehouse. The anger, disappointment and energy needs to be channeled into getting out to vote. That’s the only way to reduce future Breona Taylors and create police accountability.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/7120
User avatar
NoDopeOnSundays
Head Coach
Posts: 6,348
And1: 10,624
Joined: Nov 22, 2005
         

Re: George Floyd (and aftermath): Part 2 

Post#225 » by NoDopeOnSundays » Thu Sep 24, 2020 7:29 pm

Pointgod wrote:
3toheadmelo wrote:Riot until there is justice.


Protests and riots have worked over the summer. Right now riots will just play into the hands of the pig in the Whitehouse. The anger, disappointment and energy needs to be channeled into getting out to vote. That’s the only way to reduce future Breona Taylors and create police accountability.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/7120



What happens if Trump steals the election via supreme court ruling on mail in ballots?
Pointgod
RealGM
Posts: 10,388
And1: 10,107
Joined: Jun 28, 2014

Re: George Floyd (and aftermath): Part 2 

Post#226 » by Pointgod » Thu Sep 24, 2020 7:34 pm

NoDopeOnSundays wrote:
Pointgod wrote:
3toheadmelo wrote:Riot until there is justice.


Protests and riots have worked over the summer. Right now riots will just play into the hands of the pig in the Whitehouse. The anger, disappointment and energy needs to be channeled into getting out to vote. That’s the only way to reduce future Breona Taylors and create police accountability.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/7120



What happens if Trump steals the election via supreme court ruling on mail in ballots?


Show up to vote in person. Make sure everyone else you know that can vote, votes early and in person as well. He can’t steal **** if there’s an overwhelming turnout and vote on election night. Don’t ever feel helpless. This is in full control of the voters.

I appreciate the articles sounding the alarm that he’ll steal the election but that can only occur in the slimmest of situations and I can give you concrete reasons why it’s a lot more difficult than it sounds. Anyone just saying that he’ll steal the election without offering concrete advice on how to prevent that is trying to purposely depress the turnout against him. Stay off social media until the election, only read legitimate news sources. There is going to be a **** ton of misinformation going on.
User avatar
mpharris36
Forum Mod - Knicks
Forum Mod - Knicks
Posts: 71,731
And1: 45,023
Joined: Nov 03, 2010
     

Re: George Floyd (and aftermath): Part 2 

Post#227 » by mpharris36 » Thu Sep 24, 2020 7:37 pm

HarthorneWingo wrote:
frothbrain wrote:
K-DOT wrote:It was not a drug house, but thank you for playing.



That's how it was written in the search warrant which was based off surveillance of the suspects.
So you can blame the surveillance team and judge for signing off on faulty information.
The cops executing the warrant and returning fire are not to blame though.


Unless there are other facts involved, frothbrain is right.

He probably piggybacked on my earlier comment to that effect.


I'm sure the police do lie and the police do produce warrants on faulty information. That is why there are checks and balances. Police can't serve a warrant without a judges approval. So in theory if there is not worthwhile or sufficient evidence a warrant shouldn't be approved by a judge.

If the idea that judges are corrupt too well then at that point you shouldn't trust any level of gov't :dontknow:

People have a right to be frustrated.

The execution of the warrant seems questionable in this case (a lot due to her relationship to her ex boyfriend) but that is where the anger and hate should be. The actions at 1am after an officer was shot at through a door first I don't specifically see how they can legally charge them. It's not like its easy to de-escalate a situation after gun shots are fired or know who fired them when its behind a door and you come in you are not going to simply just ask a question after being shot.

This goes back to my point that all cops should always have body cams at all time. It would literally stop the game of who said what. It would eliminate the guessing on who told the truth and we would have the facts. I still don't understand why that isn't a requirement especially when serving a warrant where the situation could be dangerous/lethal.
BAF Spurs:

ROSTER

James Wiseman/Chris Boucher/Aleksej Pokuševski
Michael Porter Jr/Patrick Williams/Chandler Hutchinson
Isaac Okoro/Josh Green/PJ Dozier
Devin Vassell/Isaiah Joe
Tyrese Haliburton/Frank Ntilikina/RJ Hampton

Suspended - Terence Davis
Pointgod
RealGM
Posts: 10,388
And1: 10,107
Joined: Jun 28, 2014

Re: George Floyd (and aftermath): Part 2 

Post#228 » by Pointgod » Thu Sep 24, 2020 8:03 pm

K-DOT wrote:If the officers legally did nothing wrong, then there's something wrong with the laws.


Here’s the thing that the news does a poor job explaining the people’s fundamental ignorance of the law that prosecutors get away with. Grand juries only hear the evidence that prosecutors want them to hear and cases aren’t based around facts but rather the goal of prosecutor. That’s why there’s that saying that prosecutors could indict a ham sandwich. Daniel Cameron showed his hand when he said he believed the police had a right to self defense. Everything he did after establishing that position was built around that belief.

Now if another prosecutor has decided that they used excessive force or some other charges they could look at the evidence and build a case around that. Remember this is just to determine whether or not the cops faced trial. I’m going to guess that if the police weren’t investigating themselves they would find broken laws which probably wouldn’t amount to a murder charge but would acknowledge some significant wrong doing.
NYKAL
General Manager
Posts: 8,543
And1: 2,104
Joined: Nov 10, 2004
Location: LAND O NOD

Re: George Floyd (and aftermath): Part 2 

Post#229 » by NYKAL » Thu Sep 24, 2020 8:06 pm

you break into a house, don't announce yourself as police, you SHOULD expect bullets to come flying at you. foh with the BS excuses. Common sense would dictate if the homeowners hear them breaking in, they very well may react with violence.
User avatar
HarthorneWingo
Knicks Forum Grandpa's Law
Posts: 62,838
And1: 28,893
Joined: May 16, 2005
   

Re: George Floyd (and aftermath): Part 2 

Post#230 » by HarthorneWingo » Thu Sep 24, 2020 8:29 pm

Pointgod wrote:
HarthorneWingo wrote:
frothbrain wrote:

That's how it was written in the search warrant which was based off surveillance of the suspects.
So you can blame the surveillance team and judge for signing off on faulty information.
The cops executing the warrant and returning fire are not to blame though.


Unless there are other facts involved, frothbrain is right.

He probably piggybacked on my earlier comment to that effect.


So what do you think about charging the one officer for reckless endangerment for hitting the walls of Taylor’s neighbor’s house but not charging him for type of attempted manslaughter/murder? He essentially gets off because he missed. Let’s be honest the fix was in from the fact that the AG is a Republican acolyte of Mitch McConnell. Compare this to the charges that a Democratic AG brought against the cops in George Floyd’s murder?



I think the one officer who got charged with REAP will either have the charge withdrawn or the judge will kick it out. It will never go before a jury because the cop will waive his right to a jury trial and just proceed to trial before the judge.
Image
User avatar
HarthorneWingo
Knicks Forum Grandpa's Law
Posts: 62,838
And1: 28,893
Joined: May 16, 2005
   

Re: George Floyd (and aftermath): Part 2 

Post#231 » by HarthorneWingo » Thu Sep 24, 2020 8:30 pm

NYKAL wrote:you break into a house, don't announce yourself as police, you SHOULD expect bullets to come flying at you. foh with the BS excuses. Common sense would dictate if the homeowners hear them breaking in, they very well may react with violence.


The police had a legal right to execute the warrant issued by a judge for that residence.
Image
User avatar
HarthorneWingo
Knicks Forum Grandpa's Law
Posts: 62,838
And1: 28,893
Joined: May 16, 2005
   

Re: George Floyd (and aftermath): Part 2 

Post#232 » by HarthorneWingo » Thu Sep 24, 2020 8:37 pm

mpharris36 wrote:
HarthorneWingo wrote:
frothbrain wrote:

That's how it was written in the search warrant which was based off surveillance of the suspects.
So you can blame the surveillance team and judge for signing off on faulty information.
The cops executing the warrant and returning fire are not to blame though.


Unless there are other facts involved, frothbrain is right.

He probably piggybacked on my earlier comment to that effect.


I'm sure the police do lie and the police do produce warrants on faulty information. That is why there are checks and balances. Police can't serve a warrant without a judges approval. So in theory if there is not worthwhile or sufficient evidence a warrant shouldn't be approved by a judge.

If the idea that judges are corrupt too well then at that point you shouldn't trust any level of gov't :dontknow:

People have a right to be frustrated.

The execution of the warrant seems questionable in this case (a lot due to her relationship to her ex boyfriend) but that is where the anger and hate should be. The actions at 1am after an officer was shot at through a door first I don't specifically see how they can legally charge them. It's not like its easy to de-escalate a situation after gun shots are fired or know who fired them when its behind a door and you come in you are not going to simply just ask a question after being shot.

This goes back to my point that all cops should always have body cams at all time. It would literally stop the game of who said what. It would eliminate the guessing on who told the truth and we would have the facts. I still don't understand why that isn't a requirement especially when serving a warrant where the situation could be dangerous/lethal.



There may be false evidence in the warrant. We don’t know that yet, I believe.

The judge accepts all factual allegations contained in the warrant as true. It does not do a review of the PD’s investigation. It only reviews the warrant for probable cause.

From what I can tell, this tragedy is the result of faulty police practices. No one individual is guilty of “murder” or a category of homicide. “No knock” warrants are a big problem.

If Breonna’s estate was interested in finding out where all of the faults lay, they could have proceeded with litigation instead of taking the $12 million.

I think they made the right decision. We’ll get all of the info eventually.
Image
User avatar
mpharris36
Forum Mod - Knicks
Forum Mod - Knicks
Posts: 71,731
And1: 45,023
Joined: Nov 03, 2010
     

Re: George Floyd (and aftermath): Part 2 

Post#233 » by mpharris36 » Thu Sep 24, 2020 8:51 pm

HarthorneWingo wrote:
mpharris36 wrote:
HarthorneWingo wrote:
Unless there are other facts involved, frothbrain is right.

He probably piggybacked on my earlier comment to that effect.


I'm sure the police do lie and the police do produce warrants on faulty information. That is why there are checks and balances. Police can't serve a warrant without a judges approval. So in theory if there is not worthwhile or sufficient evidence a warrant shouldn't be approved by a judge.

If the idea that judges are corrupt too well then at that point you shouldn't trust any level of gov't :dontknow:

People have a right to be frustrated.

The execution of the warrant seems questionable in this case (a lot due to her relationship to her ex boyfriend) but that is where the anger and hate should be. The actions at 1am after an officer was shot at through a door first I don't specifically see how they can legally charge them. It's not like its easy to de-escalate a situation after gun shots are fired or know who fired them when its behind a door and you come in you are not going to simply just ask a question after being shot.

This goes back to my point that all cops should always have body cams at all time. It would literally stop the game of who said what. It would eliminate the guessing on who told the truth and we would have the facts. I still don't understand why that isn't a requirement especially when serving a warrant where the situation could be dangerous/lethal.



There may be false evidence in the warrant. We don’t know that yet, I believe.

The judge accepts all factual allegations contained in the warrant as true. It does not do a review of the PD’s investigation. It only reviews the warrant for probable cause.

From what I can tell, this tragedy is the result of faulty police practices. No one individual is guilty of “murder” or a category of homicide. “No knock” warrants are a big problem.

If Breonna’s estate was interested in finding out where all of the faults lay, they could have proceeded with litigation instead of taking the $12 million.

I think they made the right decision. We’ll get all of the info eventually.


Is there a situation where a warrant would be denied from a judge in terms of not enough information/legal cause?
BAF Spurs:

ROSTER

James Wiseman/Chris Boucher/Aleksej Pokuševski
Michael Porter Jr/Patrick Williams/Chandler Hutchinson
Isaac Okoro/Josh Green/PJ Dozier
Devin Vassell/Isaiah Joe
Tyrese Haliburton/Frank Ntilikina/RJ Hampton

Suspended - Terence Davis
User avatar
HarthorneWingo
Knicks Forum Grandpa's Law
Posts: 62,838
And1: 28,893
Joined: May 16, 2005
   

Re: George Floyd (and aftermath): Part 2 

Post#234 » by HarthorneWingo » Thu Sep 24, 2020 8:55 pm

mpharris36 wrote:
HarthorneWingo wrote:
mpharris36 wrote:
I'm sure the police do lie and the police do produce warrants on faulty information. That is why there are checks and balances. Police can't serve a warrant without a judges approval. So in theory if there is not worthwhile or sufficient evidence a warrant shouldn't be approved by a judge.

If the idea that judges are corrupt too well then at that point you shouldn't trust any level of gov't :dontknow:

People have a right to be frustrated.

The execution of the warrant seems questionable in this case (a lot due to her relationship to her ex boyfriend) but that is where the anger and hate should be. The actions at 1am after an officer was shot at through a door first I don't specifically see how they can legally charge them. It's not like its easy to de-escalate a situation after gun shots are fired or know who fired them when its behind a door and you come in you are not going to simply just ask a question after being shot.

This goes back to my point that all cops should always have body cams at all time. It would literally stop the game of who said what. It would eliminate the guessing on who told the truth and we would have the facts. I still don't understand why that isn't a requirement especially when serving a warrant where the situation could be dangerous/lethal.



There may be false evidence in the warrant. We don’t know that yet, I believe.

The judge accepts all factual allegations contained in the warrant as true. It does not do a review of the PD’s investigation. It only reviews the warrant for probable cause.

From what I can tell, this tragedy is the result of faulty police practices. No one individual is guilty of “murder” or a category of homicide. “No knock” warrants are a big problem.

If Breonna’s estate was interested in finding out where all of the faults lay, they could have proceeded with litigation instead of taking the $12 million.

I think they made the right decision. We’ll get all of the info eventually.


Is there a situation where a warrant would be denied from a judge in terms of not enough information/legal cause?


Yes. Judges will say, “Sorry, not enough. You need to do x,y, and z and then come back. But they’re usually pretty deferential.
Image
NYKAL
General Manager
Posts: 8,543
And1: 2,104
Joined: Nov 10, 2004
Location: LAND O NOD

Re: George Floyd (and aftermath): Part 2 

Post#235 » by NYKAL » Fri Sep 25, 2020 12:23 pm

HarthorneWingo wrote:
NYKAL wrote:you break into a house, don't announce yourself as police, you SHOULD expect bullets to come flying at you. foh with the BS excuses. Common sense would dictate if the homeowners hear them breaking in, they very well may react with violence.


The police had a legal right to execute the warrant issued by a judge for that residence.


I'm not disputing that. I'm stating that common sense should have had them aware of the likely possibility that the homeowner would react to protect his home from an intruder. If I run up in someones home, I'm expecting resistance.

I've said for years, someone enters my home, I'm hitting the circuit breaker and turning off all the lights. Then I'm hunting the **** down.
User avatar
HarthorneWingo
Knicks Forum Grandpa's Law
Posts: 62,838
And1: 28,893
Joined: May 16, 2005
   

Re: George Floyd (and aftermath): Part 2 

Post#236 » by HarthorneWingo » Fri Sep 25, 2020 5:45 pm

NYKAL wrote:
HarthorneWingo wrote:
NYKAL wrote:you break into a house, don't announce yourself as police, you SHOULD expect bullets to come flying at you. foh with the BS excuses. Common sense would dictate if the homeowners hear them breaking in, they very well may react with violence.


The police had a legal right to execute the warrant issued by a judge for that residence.


I'm not disputing that. I'm stating that common sense should have had them aware of the likely possibility that the homeowner would react to protect his home from an intruder. If I run up in someones home, I'm expecting resistance.

I've said for years, someone enters my home, I'm hitting the circuit breaker and turning off all the lights. Then I'm hunting the **** down.


And that’s a great defense to homicide if you shoot and kill a cop who forces their way into you home.
Image
Pointgod
RealGM
Posts: 10,388
And1: 10,107
Joined: Jun 28, 2014

Re: George Floyd (and aftermath): Part 2 

Post#237 » by Pointgod » Mon Sep 28, 2020 1:09 am

Jesus this case just keep getting more and more shady. So now they don’t even know if the shot from Taylor’s boyfriend is the one that actually hit the officer.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/ballistics-report-raises-questions-breonna-taylor-shooting-attorney/story?id=73279097
User avatar
HarthorneWingo
Knicks Forum Grandpa's Law
Posts: 62,838
And1: 28,893
Joined: May 16, 2005
   

Re: George Floyd (and aftermath): Part 2 

Post#238 » by HarthorneWingo » Mon Sep 28, 2020 3:52 am

Pointgod wrote:Jesus this case just keep getting more and more shady. So now they don’t even know if the shot from Taylor’s boyfriend is the one that actually hit the officer.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/ballistics-report-raises-questions-breonna-taylor-shooting-attorney/story?id=73279097


So, Breonna's boyfriend did shoot first [at the officers] but we don't know if that bullet struck one of the officers present?

I don't know that it changes the landscape for bringing murder charges against the officers who killed Breonna.
Image
User avatar
HarthorneWingo
Knicks Forum Grandpa's Law
Posts: 62,838
And1: 28,893
Joined: May 16, 2005
   

Re: George Floyd (and aftermath): Part 2 

Post#239 » by HarthorneWingo » Tue Sep 29, 2020 8:03 pm

https://www.fox13memphis.com/news/trending/judge-orders-judicial-review-2014-nypd-chokehold-death-eric-garner/DPIMS7KSSRCEFPUFRJAW7P4LLI/

Judge orders judicial review in 2014 NYPD chokehold death of Eric Garner

By: Crystal Bonvillian, Cox Media Group National Content Desk
Updated: September 28, 2020 - 4:50 PM

STATEN ISLAND, N.Y. — A New York judge has ordered a judicial inquiry into the death of Eric Garner more than six years after the Staten Island man died following a chokehold by a New York City police officer.

*****

New York Supreme Court Judge Joan Madden on Thursday ordered a summary inquiry into Garner’s case. Garner’s mother and sister sought a probe into several allegations against the New York Police Department, including, in part, an alleged lack of immediate medical aid for Garner on the scene; alleged lies in police reports and the unauthorized release of Garner’s arrest and medical records.
NBC News reported that Madden’s ruling is part of the civil litigation against the city by Garner’s mother, Gwen Carr, and his sister, Ellisha Flagg. The family was awarded $5.9 million in 2015 in a civil lawsuit.

-more-

Image
User avatar
stuporman
RealGM
Posts: 21,399
And1: 6,641
Joined: Nov 27, 2005
Location: optimistic skeptical realist

Re: George Floyd (and aftermath): Part 2 

Post#240 » by stuporman » Tue Sep 29, 2020 9:01 pm

Evidence of the cozy relationship and quite often protection of the authorities with right wing conservative domestic terrorists keeps piling up.

Read on Twitter
Image?

Return to New York Knicks