Protesters want justice for George Floyd.
Black Lives Matter protesters have taken to the streets of London for the second day running in solidarity with those in the US over the death of George Floyd, as more march through Cardiff as well.
Thousands of demonstrators were packed into Trafalgar Square on Sunday, chanting ‘I can’t breathe,’ the words Floyd was heard gasping as a white police officer knelt on his neck in Minneapolis.
Having spent the last few months in coronavirus lockdown, very few of the attendees appeared to be concerned about social distancing.
It comes as dozens of American cities have been set ablaze amid violent rioting and violent clashes with police officers over the death of Floyd on Monday.
What!?!
Okay, what happened to Floyd was dreadful – it was a classic example of the violence of the state in extremis. There was no justification for kneeling on a man’s neck. The cop responsible has been sacked and arrested and rightly so. The images were a disgrace to the Minnesota Police Department. However, justice must take its usual process.
Presumably – if they haven’t already – charges will follow. Later we can expect a trial and if convicted, a lengthy prison sentence. What is there about this that isn’t justice? Justice will take time. There is a process to follow. Or do these people actually just want a good old fashioned lynching?
And what is there about this that makes it okay to loot shops and set them on fire? What is there about this that makes it okay to shoot a cop who had nothing to do with Floyd’s death?
And what the flying fuck has a murder in the USA got to do with London or Cardiff?
BLM have said of their protest in London: ‘We are doing this to place pressure on the American government and show that this is a world wide issue.’
No, it isn’t. Oh, yeah, silly me – all whiteys are waaycists. I expect it will all be Trump’s fault somehow.
That said, didn’t a black cop in Minnesota murder a white woman not so long ago?
ON WEDNESDAY EVENING, outside the Hennepin County government building in downtown Minneapolis, a few dozen community activists gathered in the cold to process the rare and polarizing conviction of Mohamed Noor, a Somali American and former police officer. A day earlier, a Hennepin County jury found 33-year-old Noor guilty of third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter in the death of Justine Ruszczyk Damond, who had called the police to report a possible sexual assault in her neighborhood in the summer of 2017. Noor shot and killed her, and at trial, he claimed self-defense.
Naturally, there were worldwide protests and looting from Antifa and BLM demanding justice…
…
…
…
Crickets…
Absolutely nothing. This is just the usual left-wing agitators wearing a “Black Lives Matter” badge rather than their usual Momentum, Antifa, Extinction Rebellion ones. This just another way of showing their hatred and contempt for those who want democratically elected sanity rather than their undemocratic chaos. It’s long past time all of these groups were recognised as the criminal organisations that they actually are (funded by foreign money from our enemies). They have done enormous criminal and economic damage to the UK which go far beyond the realm of lawful protest and should be proscribed in the same way Al Muhajiroun is.
.
Which just goes to show that you should never call the police unless you have no alternative (i.e. short of injury or death).
The police are not your friends, do not work for you, will not protect you and do not serve you. This is doubly true in the US where you face an execution style death if you “surprise” armed police for relatively human behaviours such as being frightened and female. Being black makes the risks far, far worse.
The state is not your friend.
Nothing says “Seeking Justice” like looting designer handbags and 64″ HD TV’s does it? I never considered that Louis Vitton etc spent their off hours wandering the streets randomly shooting people. Strange that when black children are shot by black gang members “Black Lives (spl)Matter” have nothing to say. Clearly, some lives are more politically useful (lucrative?) than others.
You know you’re getting old if you can remember when the wounds from ‘400 years’ of oppression was salved by VCRs.
At least ‘progress’ has made the TVs so much bigger now carrying them away occupies TWO looters instead of one…
From what I’ve seen of the Trafalgar Square protests, those attending look like Swappies to me, members, supporters or morons encouraged out by the Socialist Workers Party. You can rely on the Swappies to colonise any an all causes like this one. They’ve done it with other race related protests, with the anti globalisation lot, with various Green causes and of course with student protests. The SWP via their RESPECT vehicle were also instrumental in encouraging and exacerbating race and faith based politics in places like Tower Hamlets when George Galloway was running with them. The SWP have never and will never amount to any significant threat to the nation via electoral politics, but they are dangerous in so far as they can readily mobilise a lot of angry and sometimes violent bodies on the streets and have their fingers in a lot of radical political pies.
Yup! Despite all the ‘Black lives matter’ posters and placards, spotting a black face in that crowd was harder than spotting a sultana in a Co-Op Value brand spotted dick..
Back in 1994, I was on the picket line during the signaller strike for my sins. The SWP turned up for that. Nothing to do with them. It was a dispute about terms and conditions. Bugger all to do with the SWP, but didn’t stop them gatecrashing.
Meanwhile my TV programmes are being interrupted by ads for water aid. Black folk waiting for whitey to come and sort out their water supplies it appears.
SG: have you no heart? Those ” charities’ ” plush London offices won’t pay for themselves, you know!
And Action Aid – all these little black girls are being sexually abused – they can’t tell us and we can’t show you, but give us your money.
Oxfam etc have been digging wells for Africans for >70 years, surely by now they have at least one each?
imo they should have been digging sewers to solve contaminated water problem. But, a solution means Oxfam no longer needed – don’t teach a man to fish, feed him…
Like all the other fake charities, they need a problem to solve. Stonewall springs to mind. Its reason for existing ceased with decriminalisation of homosexuality, but no, there is always another faux outrage that needs their input. Oxfam et al work in the same way. If Africa didn’t need white saviours, they would all be out of a job.
So this country is basically just a theme park for infantilised race baiting anti-white bigots? Well I can’t see anything indicating that it isn’t.
My thoughts? Not pleasant, and can’t be posted here. I’m you all know what I mean as I imagine quite a few of you are thinking the same.
Cunning Tory plot to distract us from the real news about Cummings.
You’re judge and jury? Bit of the msm “guilty without trial” infection
Neck kneel is common restraint technique
Let’s remember, plod were investigating report of attempted fraud (fake bank notes), George Floyd was in close vicinity and matched description. When plod questioned he became aggressive and ‘mental’, plod restrained
‘mental’: crack head like Dianne Abbot’s [jailed] son? ‘Roid rage Chris Cuomo?
But … but … he wuz turnin’ his life aroun’ … Which he needed to do after a lengthy arrest and conviction record:
http://street-pharmacy.blogspot.com/2020/05/wayne-to-answer-your-question.html
So not the choirboy character being portrayed by all and sundry. And, due to the way that the States handle criminal records etc. that is from just one jurisdiction – there may be others that are not listed.
Besides, the more you look into things, the more things are brought into question. He had a heart problem and an autopsy reveals he did NOT die of asphyxiation:
https://www.complex.com/life/2020/05/george-floyd-autopsy-underlying-health-conditions-likely-caused-death
And the officer and Floyd worked together as security at a night club before the incident and were known to each other:
https://kstp.com/news/george-floyd-fired-officer-overlapped-security-shifts-at-south-minneapolis-club-may-28-2020/5743990/
But as this blog entry describes, there are two ‘camps” with opposing views. One is that justice is whatever result we want (he was innocent, the cops killed him) and the other is let us go through due process (i.e. investigate the facts and make a decision based on those facts). The two are not mutually compatible.
http://street-pharmacy.blogspot.com/2020/05/one-mag-dump-away.html
Since “we” have only been allowed to see a few seconds of what was undoubtedly a long interaction between the two, then I will reserve judgement until such times that I know a bit more about the whole incident.
Glad you didn’t post George Floyd’s porn video as well…
Yes, I saw this too. However, Floyd’s past history (while unsurprising) isn’t relevant to what happened on the day, which is why I’ve not mentioned it. Suspects are supposed to be arrested and kept alive, after all. This one died. Therefore, due process needs to follow to get to the bottom of it. And, yes, if found guilty of murder then a long prison sentence. Rioting and looting is not a proportional response.
On the matter of cause of death – again, the coroner’s verdict along with any criminal prosecutions will determine the facts of the matter. Kneeling on someone’s neck is a dangerous method of restraint, precisely because they may have underlying health conditions. That he didn’t die directly of asphyxiation doesn’t mean that the neck kneel wasn’t the ultimate cause of death.
Informative. Thanks Phil
Nope. Dying while being arrested is pretty dreadful by any measure. Kneeling on someone’s neck until they pass out – after the cuffs have already been fitted – is well out of order. While the neck kneel is allowed, it is so potentially dangerous is it discouraged and should only be used for a very short space of time. By no stretch of the imagination is eight minutes a reasonable period (which is what is being alleged. Even so, long enough to kill is too long). The suspect had long since been subdued.
There were three other offices present, so subduing a suspect to the point of killing him is definitely violence beyond the call. No, I’m not judge and jury and nothing I said indicates that I believe that I am. I can however certainly recognise overreach when I see evidence of it. Indeed, I clearly stated that the judicial process must be followed.
Et tu? 😉
Agree with everything you say in the main article LR.
‘Neck kneel is common restraint technique’ – not sure where or when you received your control and restraint training Pcar but use of neck holds or kneeling on someones neck or back was expressly forbidden when l received mine.
What l saw in the ‘Floydd videos’ would (and should) constitute grounds for dismissal and possibly prosecution especially as there is video showing the cop kneeling on his neck, a second kneeling on his upper legs and a third holding his feet while a fourth stood over them watching. This was not ‘control and restraint’ as such, it was the deliberate, and (apparently) unnecessary, use of risky techniques which inflict considerable pain to dominate a suspect.
Before you right me off as a bleeding heart liberal l’m anything but, however there is more than enough video of the incident to draw the conclusion that this was excessive force by any definition. In addition, if you are going to scrutinise Floyd’s history you should also scrutinise that of the copper kneeling on his neck – he has form as well.
Once they had him down to that level of restraint the ONLY arguably “needed” thing beyond handcuffs would have been ankle cuffs. No matter HOW violent someone might be, when they’re ankles are cuffed together and their hands are cuffed behind their back they’re not going to be able to inflict much damage on anyone.
– MJM
Et tu?
Nope. Lot’s of my mates from 16 onwards did/do pot. I said No. Same when some used gas, glue, speed, ecstasy or anything else. “Peer pressure” is a pathetic excuse for taking crime, drugs etc
The point being, you have no idea whether Floyd was under the influence at the time of his arrest. You were making a value judgement. The very thing you claimed that I was doing. Hence my facetious comment. I was not suggesting that you were a crack head.
Like you I eschewed narcotics – that includes the milder recreational substances such as alcohol and tobacco. Tried the former briefly and didn’t like it. Didn’t mix with riding a motorcycle.
An aggressive, violent crack head
What we don’t know is whether he was under the influence at the time of the incident. There may well have been evidence in the post mortem, but drugs of abuse remain in the system long after the initial effects. As, indeed, those who have failed drugs tests when applying for work on the railway will testify.
There is some suggestion from the video evidence (which remains unsubstantiated) that Floyd was carrying drugs at the time of his arrest and dropped them at the scene. So while he may not have been actually intoxicated, he had a history of drug use and may have been carrying drugs when arrested.
Entirely possible, but I prefer not to jump to any conclusions.
Even if true, it doesn’t justify kneeling on his neck after he had been subdued.
Report did not say traces, evidence, past use..
Report said: Fentanyl intoxication (affected by alcohol or drugs to the point where physical and mental control is markedly diminished) and “recent methamphetamine use” beyond ‘under the influence’ and was “mental” as initial police report stated
Stop digging
I’m not the one digging here. I made a fairly simple point – I’m not jumping to conclusions, nor making any assumptions. The report merely says recent. How recent? We don’t know. Going by the quantities mentioned in the report, sometime in the previous twenty four hours looks likely, but that’s just a guess on my part. It merely lists them as other significant conditions. It makes no other assertions.
Not that this makes any difference to the material fact that he was subjected to excessive restraint and died as a consequence, which the report acknowledges in referring the the death as homicide.
Since this discussion started, there has been a second autopsy.
No one can say for sure until it has all played out. I don’t know whether he was under the influence at the time and neither do you.
@John, Post-mortem: said: Fentanyl intoxication
@LR, He wasn’t ‘subdued’ he was resisting/fighting being put in squad car. He was subdued soley by authorised neck kneel
https://jcalebjones.com/2020/05/30/the-problems-with-the-prosecution-of-derek-chauvin/
As I’ve said, we don’t have all of the facts. That will come out in the trial.
Nah. He was already cuffed by that time. He had three officers pinning him down, one on his chest, one on his legs and one on his neck. That’s excessive. And even if it is authorised, it’s a dangerous method of restraint as others here have already pointed out. Death is a foreseeable consequence of such a method. Hence criminal charges are perfectly appropriate. Even if the suspect is resisting arrest, the officers have a basic duty of care.
All of that said, I wonder just how Chauvin can expect a fair trial and how safe any conviction will be as there will be politics involved now. Whatever comes out it is likely to be unsatisfactory for either or both sides of this equation.
Post-mortem says:
Fentanyl intoxication – not recent use
Recent use was methamphetamine
You need to look at meaning of homicide too
Did you read the Prosecution Case?
Six days ago, I made a facetious remark about you jumping to conclusions having made the same allegation about me. Hence the “et tu?” It was a joke. I was pulling your leg.
Rather than simply acknowledge the point or let it go, here we are torturing the point to death. The joke, what there was of it, has long since been lost.
Okay, nowhere in the autopsy report does it use the word intoxication and nor would I expect it to as this is a subjective observation, not an objective one. It merely details the amount found in the system and the effects it had on the body. As I have said to you, existence in the system is not the same thing as being under the influence at the time of arrest because unlike alcohol, substances of abuse remain in the system for some considerable time after the effects have worn off.
Again, as I have said to you, neither of us were there. We don’t know what his behaviour was like prior to the arrival of the police. All we do know is that he attempted to resist arrest and having watched the CCTV footage from across the street where his car was parked and he was initially accosted, there was nothing to suggest that he was high or violent, what resistance there was was pretty passive, frankly. He may have been under the influence, he may not have been. We don’t know and as I have repeatedly pointed out, it is wrong to jump to conclusions. But nothing – absolutely nothing in that footage offers any suggestion that there was a justification for the level of restraint used and certainly not for eight minutes, long after he had stopped breathing and become unresponsive.
Yes, I’ve read the case and I agree that there are flaws that may yet lead to acquittal on the charges presented (again, I indicated as much in previous comments about the politicisation of the case – including as it turns out, the choice of prosecutor). It appears rushed to satisfy the mob. However, like the rest of us, the article’s writer is having to make assumptions because, like us he does not have access to all of the evidence.
Yes, I do know what homicide means. I’d appreciate not being patronised, thanks.
Given that this conversation has outstayed its welcome and there is nothing more to say until such time as the case itself moves on, I’m drawing a line under this one. So this is my final word on it. Enough already.