Posts: 13,934
Threads: 1,261
Joined: May 2025
A lot of trials of police officers charged with injuring or killing someone involve the juries being asked to make the judgment that in a few quick seconds or less that an officer made the wrong decision to fire their weapon. There's a good chance the officer who shot 13 year old Adam Toledo in Chicago won't face any charges, but if he does the jury will have to find that he made an unreasonable decision to fire in that split second.
But there was nothing split second about what Chauvin did to Floyd. The expert pulmonologist said that Chauvin stayed on Floyd's neck for three more minutes after Floyd had already died. I doubt any "impartial" jury would see what happened and not find him guilty (of course, there is always the prospect of a rogue juror that isn't anywhere near impartial, though).
Posts: 17,294
Threads: 1,510
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
1
Pray for "consecutive"...
==
Posts: 17,873
Threads: 325
Joined: Mar 2024
C(-)ris wrote:
[quote=Lemon Drop]
[quote=Ted King]
A lot of trials of police officers charged with injuring or killing someone involve the juries being asked to make the judgment that in a few quick seconds or less that an officer made the wrong decision to fire their weapon. There's a good chance the officer who shot 13 year old Adam Toledo in Chicago won't face any charges, but if he does the jury will have to find that he made an unreasonable decision to fire in that split second.
.
By that logic it is not possible to comply with police orders to surrender. The cop yelled "drop the f÷cking gun" and he did.
Why bother to even say that? The child dropped whatever was in his hand and put up both hands, facing the police. Why should he then be
Shot to death?
He tossed the gun around the fence with his hand moving in front of his body shielded from the officers view. In the same movement he turned his body around to face the officer(which wasn't commanded) and the hand that had the gun in it was still not visible the entire time he was turning. The officer had no idea that the gun was dropped and didn't have any way of knowing that. This happened in .8 of a second in low light. He had a life or death split second choice to make. Shoot or given the best available knowledge be shot. It is easy to say after the fact it was the wrong choice once you have all the information and time to process it.
You sure have a keen sense for defending the decisions of cops who kill people.
Posts: 13,934
Threads: 1,261
Joined: May 2025
Lemon Drop wrote:
[quote=Ted King]
A lot of trials of police officers charged with injuring or killing someone involve the juries being asked to make the judgment that in a few quick seconds or less that an officer made the wrong decision to fire their weapon. There's a good chance the officer who shot 13 year old Adam Toledo in Chicago won't face any charges, but if he does the jury will have to find that he made an unreasonable decision to fire in that split second.
.
By that logic it is not possible to comply with police orders to surrender. The cop yelled "drop the f÷cking gun" and he did.
Why bother to even say that? The child dropped whatever was in his hand and put up both hands, facing the police. Why should he then be
Shot to death?
Just to be clear - I do not advocate for finding the officer who shot Toledo innocent. I was just trying to point out why I think police officers are often not found guilty by juries - that juries tend to want to give the officer the benefit of the doubt (makes it harder to get to "beyond reasonable doubt") when the decisions they make are made very quickly in volatile conditions.
Posts: 13,934
Threads: 1,261
Joined: May 2025
Lemon Drop wrote:
[quote=Ted King]
Just to be clear - I do not advocate for finding the officer who shot Toledo innocent. I was just trying to point out why I think police officers are often not found guilty by juries - that juries tend to want to give the officer the benefit of the doubt (makes it harder to get to "beyond reasonable doubt") when the decisions they make are made very quickly in volatile conditions.
Maybe it's time to stop defending and giving cover to all the excuses for killing people? The problem has not been juries, it's been the lack of any prosecution at all. And lies and cover up from police amd prosecutors.
Who made the situation with this child "life or death?" It was not the child. He was running away from police, they were chasing him. They did not know who he was or if he had committed any crime or if he was a threat to anyone. They got a report of shots fired at 2 am. That was it. After the killing apparently the cop called his supervisor and said "this one looks young" referring to the Mexican American child lying there dead. They did not know who he was for 2 more days.
I agree with most of that. I was trying to present one of the reasons I think this jury trial against an officer came out differently than many other trials of police officers. I didn't intend to imply anything about the lack of charges being filed in the first place in many instances of police killing someone that did not appear to be an immediate threat.
Posts: 10,396
Threads: 172
Joined: May 2025
Reputation:
0
How many police will "resign" over the next few weeks as a result of this verdict? And are they all bums? How many will even care. Who knows.
