• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: deficiT | tryptakid | Foreigner

Police Brutality Thread

aemetha said:
There's a 1957 classic movie called "12 Angry Men" which is actually a remarkably true to life depiction of how a jury trial goes from the perspective of the jury, and particularly how they deliberate. I would certainly recommend checking it out, even just for entertainment value. It's one of those movies that doesn't get old.
Click to expand...
Hello.

For some obscure reason I seem to recall seeing that movie (1997 remake). But for the life of me I cannot remember how it went. Just noticed it's (1997 remake) on YouTube Movies (as of Jan. 8, 2021) (how's that for pretty good timing). Thanks a lot.
 
dalpat077 said:
Well I cannot argue with the semantics let's face it. And as I noted this morning: it's a sad state of affairs all around actually. Not much more I can say without rehashing or repeating a whole bunch of stuff that I'm sure you, and others, have already tired of.





Well. You're right here too. I guess I'm jumping the gun and already assuming outcomes. In the case of the two deceased individuals though: their very actions precluded them from receiving due process. I'm sorry but I cannot be swayed on this. I don't know if you have wasted the amount of time that I have on this or if you will or if you need to. But please believe me when I say that there are other multiple examples, as per body cam footage, where the very same outcome was the result and all had one common denominator at least i.e. let's call it failure to comply (in one form or another). People cannot, surely, be encouraged to simply ignore law enforcement or fail to comply at their will. Otherwise there's little to no point in even having a police force in the first place.
Click to expand...
Restraining suspects with force is sometimes necessary. The issue here is excessive force. Force that goes beyond releasing that said force once the suspect is compliant. When you have a man with no pulse on the ground at the 5 minute mark, kneeling on his neck for an additional 4 minutes is the reason Chauvin was charged.
 
Well here's something interesting (22 hours old).

Duty To Intervene Law? Now that could have saved us all a bunch of bother not? Looks like the NTSB way ahead of the times i.e. changed training and procedures DECADES ago so that a co-pilot would have the right to intervene, without fear of reprisal, should they deem it necessary i.e. if the Captain was playing up (forgive the lack of technical terms and jargon).

 
Last edited:
aemetha said:
There's a 1957 classic movie called "12 Angry Men" which is actually a remarkably true to life depiction of how a jury trial goes from the perspective of the jury, and particularly how they deliberate. I would certainly recommend checking it out, even just for entertainment value. It's one of those movies that doesn't get old.
Click to expand...
Excellent movie and one of my favorites. Who played the lead guy that convinced the other jurors that the young man didn't kill the person he was charged with killing ? Was an excellent watch when I saw it years ago.
 
dalpat077 said:
On topic (for now).

I heard on FOX last night (radio) (I'm a fucking sucker for punishment huh):

In Mr. Floyd's trial I didn't realize that the jurors were going home every night and will only be sequestered once deliberations start. Is that for real or did I misunderstand what I heard?

I was under the impression that they were all holed up in a hotel or something and were not allowed to discuss the case with anyone and not even among themselves?
Click to expand...
The Defense wanted the jurors sequestered during the Case in Chief . The judge denied the motion and instead did an aggressive voir dire. And another voir dire after the settlement to the Floyd family. Most US trials don't sequester jurors during testimony. Only during deliberation. And hardly during deliberation either.
 
If anyone wants a different perspective on this trial I recommend watching the last 20 minutes of " A time to kill. " Just watch the Defense closing argument. Pretty much says it all in my opinion. It's too bad race was even interjected into this thread. Color with your magic markers, if you will, all the parties green. Then watch the video and listen to all the testimony. Then base your decision on the LEGAL aspects of the case as the jury will be instructed to do on Monday.
 
I really feel bad for Chauvin and the bad judgement he made, I support the blue line and always will, those other cops are just as responsible I'll keep saying it, instead of those cops turning their backs and making sure no one got close, when Chauvin had Floyd pinned, those other officers should have intervened cuffed Floyd throw him in the back of the patrol unit and have the medics check him out, if Floyd was under duress and showing ill symptoms, they could've rushed him to a hospital, he would've still been on this Earth.
 
Pumpkin2021 said:
The Defense wanted the jurors sequestered during the Case in Chief . The judge denied the motion and instead did an aggressive voir dire. And another voir dire after the settlement to the Floyd family. Most US trials don't sequester jurors during testimony. Only during deliberation. And hardly during deliberation either.
Click to expand...
Very interesting. This like the gift that keeps on giving this! :)

Well apparently they're being sequestered in this trial though (at least that's my understanding anyway). As to how much of a difference that makes: no idea.

For somebody that wanted the fuck out of this thread I'm not doing a great job! Note to self: try harder! It won't be long at this rate that my post count on this thread will exceed that of the election thread(s). And neither having any direct impact on my life either! :ROFLMAO: Drugs? Keep me away from the keyboard? :unsure: Um. Nah. Maybe not. Fuck no. Imagine this dude on Meth.! 🔥
 
LordOfThisWorld said:
I really feel bad for Chauvin and the bad judgement he made, I support the blue line and always will, those other cops are just as responsible I'll keep saying it, instead of those cops turning their backs and making sure no one got close, when Chauvin had Floyd pinned, those other officers should have intervened cuffed Floyd throw him in the back of the patrol unit and have the medics check him out, if Floyd was under duress and showing ill symptoms, they could've rushed him to a hospital, he would've still been on this Earth.
Click to expand...
Couldn't have summed it up better myself. :) Nice post.
 
LordOfThisWorld said:
I really feel bad for Chauvin and the bad judgement he made, I support the blue line and always will, those other cops are just as responsible I'll keep saying it, instead of those cops turning their backs and making sure no one got close, when Chauvin had Floyd pinned, those other officers should have intervened cuffed Floyd throw him in the back of the patrol unit and have the medics check him out, if Floyd was under duress and showing ill symptoms, they could've rushed him to a hospital, he would've still been on this Earth.
Click to expand...
Thats quite the edgy statement in this day in age. You know they've been largely Infiltrated by white supracist and far right groups right ?
 
dalpat077 said:
Very interesting. This like the gift that keeps on giving this! :)

Well apparently they're being sequestered in this trial though (at least that's my understanding anyway). As to how much of a difference that makes: no idea.

For somebody that wanted the fuck out of this thread I'm not doing a great job! Note to self: try harder! It won't be long at this rate that my post count on this thread will exceed that of the election thread(s). And neither having any direct impact on my life either! :ROFLMAO: Drugs? Keep me away from the keyboard? :unsure: Um. Nah. Maybe not. Fuck no. Imagine this dude on Meth.! 🔥
Click to expand...
The jurors are being sequestered during deliberations on this one. It is for their safety. Like in the OJ trial. When two opposing factors ( people in this case ) have real strong opinions ( race ) the judge takes all precautions.
 
Zephyn said:
Thats quite the edgy statement in this day in age. You know they've been largely Infiltrated by white supracist and far right groups right ?
Click to expand...
I know you probably think I'm picking on you. I assure I'm not i.e. I have no reason to do that. At all.

But my opinion is that this is just another narrative and one that's not helping the situation.

For the sake of argument though let's just assume it's fact for a minute. I still don't believe it would have somebody willingly and knowingly toss a career in law enforcement. Maybe it would have them come down harder on people of color. Maybe. But not to the extent where it would cost them their careers. And certainly not in a public space such as was the case here.

What @LordOfThisWorld posted would have been the second best option for everyone concerned (I say second best because my default position remains the same no matter how hard I've questioned it). Only problem is: would there still have been ramifications for Officer Chauvin? Best case scenario: he'd have lost his shit with the other officers after the fact, maybe they'd have ended up in a bit of a brawl, and it was left at that?

As great an idea as that "Duty To Intervene Law" is: it doesn't come without it's own inherent problems. It's unclear to me whether it would be automatically applied or if it would be an officer's choice to enforce it against a fellow officer. It it's automatically applied: that'd make the other officers hesitant to intervene once again. In the case above: her fellow officer still did time and lost his career (although he looks like he was a real fucking peach does he not). Then again: you could end up with police officers slinging it out on the street between each other while the criminals get up and run away.

Nah. Fuck this. It's doing my head in! 🤪
 
Not to mention they descended from the slave patrol sheriffs themselves. The drug war, and what the cia did to ghettos with crack, and mandatory minimums means there are more African Americans doing forced labor today than during the Civil War. Literally.
 
dalpat077 said:
I know you probably think I'm picking on you. I assure I'm not i.e. I have no reason to do that. At all.

But my opinion is that this is just another narrative and one that's not helping the situation.

For the sake of argument though let's just assume it's fact for a minute. I still don't believe it would have somebody willingly and knowingly toss a career in law enforcement. Maybe it would have them come down harder on people of color. Maybe. But not to the extent where it would cost them their careers. And certainly not in a public space such as was the case here.

What @LordOfThisWorld posted would have been the second best option for everyone concerned (I say second best because my default position remains the same no matter how hard I've questioned it). Only problem is: would there still have been ramifications for Officer Chauvin? Best case scenario: he'd have lost his shit with the other officers after the fact, maybe they'd have ended up in a bit of a brawl, and it was left at that?

As great an idea as that "Duty To Intervene Law" is: it doesn't come without it's own inherent problems. It's unclear to me whether it would be automatically applied or if it would be an officer's choice to enforce it against a fellow officer. It it's automatically applied: that'd make the other officers hesitant to intervene once again. In the case above: her fellow officer still did time and lost his career (although he looks like he was a real fucking peach does he not). Then again: you could end up with police officers slinging it out on the street between each other while the criminals get up and run away.

Nah. Fuck this. It's doing my head in! 🤪
Click to expand...
Likely if any of the cops had intervened and saved his life it would have just ended in them being fired. Hence the problem of why there's no good cops. The vast majority are morally bankrupt, and have been running the show for the long while. If there's any reason I got targeted with rape it may have been some of my organizing around trying to use psychedelic cultural engineering to encourage leftist hippies to infiltrate the cops, and other areas of political office. Tune, in, turn on, plug in. But ill shut up before I'm shot.
 
Apologies to CEPS posters and mods for not being completely saintlike yesterday in this thread. People exercising the freedom to say whatever thought that comes to mind, need to understand that other people read and interpret the things you say and have just as much freedom to respond to you.

They haven't replaced us with AI yet, so trust that if you are going to talk out a point that it's ok for drug users to be killed, I just might have something to say about it. I might be a degenerate socialist, but freedom of speech is still incredibly important to me and I am opposed to censorship. Extreme care is taken to not restrict you guys. All I ask is that you have the emotional maturity to not cry wolf if we trade a couple barbs. I'm the last person to report you or censor you and would much rather let you know how I feel about what you say.

This probably wasn't a great apology, but like I said I try to keep it real.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top