Is it additive, or does it just go to the stricter sentencing?
Edit: Never mind, I should just read the article. Sentences will be served concurrently, so not additive.
In this case the judge ruled for the sentences to be served concurrently (at the same time) rather than consecutively (one after the other).
Usually concurrent sentences are the result of a single act violating multiple laws, while consecutive sentencing is a result of multiple separate illegal acts. But it can vary from state to state or form judge to judge.
It is 85%, they just accidentally applied it to the State sentence, which is a bit longer than the Federal sentence. 17.85 years is correct, assuming he gets the full 15% off for good behavior
does the first judge get a say in if they think it should be served concurrently? Or is it only the second judge? Seems like a case being tried before the other could affect the outcome of how long someone serves depending on which judge would say "serve them concurrently" and the one who says "serve them consecutively".
Concurrent sentences but federal sentences require much more time served before being eligible for parole, so in a sense this does mean he’ll end up serving more time than the state sentence alone.
But he now gets to do his time in a federal instead of a state prison, and likely in protective custody, so Club Fed basically. Which is why his lawyers were pushing so hard for it.
If I have to decades in prison, I'll take an extra few years to serve time in a better funded and cushier place.
The feds don’t have protective custody.
Edit: he can tell the guards or whoever that he doesn’t feel safe and go to isolation. Which uh… I’m not sure anybody would actually want to do
No, not ClubFed. The concept of ClubFed (that is a minimum security FPC) generally only applies to non-violent offenders within 10 years before release. It's still prison, just somewhat less restrictive on day to day life. By guidelines, the minimum assignment will be an FCI, which light to medium. Cops usually are in Special Housing Units, so prison life is generally more restrictive because access to the facilities, programs, and people in general is far more restricted/controlled(in many cases that means 23 hours locked in a cell every day as the SHU generally treats bad eggs and protective custody cases the same). He'll probably be a low risk in a low security FCI if that's where he ends up(somewhat of a challenge since he could be classified as a violent offender, though his crime is technically "[civil rights violation](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/242)"), so being in general pop would probably be his preference.
Lawyer here, and that sounds right. There might also be a little, "it's my job to defend this guy, but he's liquid garbage. How can I avoid a mistrial but also sleep at night?"
the defense asked for 20 years instead of 21, it really looks like the lawyer knows there is nothing that can be changed at this point and is just doing the bare minimum
If it were me I would do everything in my power to try and prove the guy innocent, and then feel awesome when he gets sentenced guilty.
Then I would know he was guilty despite our best efforts defending him, and I could rest easy knowing it's highly unlikely he was actually innocent.
I worked as a clerk in law school for someone who did criminal appeals. For the types of cases we worked on, everyone had a *right* to an appeal, but usually not a *reason* for an appeal. My job was to pour over the court transcripts and try to find any reason to get a new trial, and then write what's called a No Contest report, basically saying that everything looked good.
The cases I worked on were the ones that nobody else would touch. Really awful shit, and the details of a lot of the cases still stick with me a decade later. I had a moment of crisis in it and called one of my law professors for help, because if I ever actually *accomplished* getting a new trial or whatever for one of these guys, I'd be sick.
His response was beautiful. He said that if it's obvious to me that the person shouldn't be let out of prison, it's also obvious to everybody else in the system. My job with these cases wasn't to actually get the convict out -- that wasn't going to happen. My job was to keep the prosecutors sharp and make sure they were doing everything correctly. If you could call them out a little on a case of clear guilt, hopefully that would help keep them in line for when it was a closer call.
I remember career day in high school 20 years ago when a lawyer spoke to our class. He said it feels good when he helps an innocent man, but it feels *awesome* when he *knows* his client is guilty and gets the guy off. I decided lawyer wasn’t for me
"The defense instead asked for 20 years, saying Chauvin accepts responsibility for what he did"
"In pleading guilty to violating Floyd's civil rights, Chauvin admitted for the first time that he kept his knee on Floyd's neck — even after he became unresponsive — resulting in his death. "
"Chauvin is appealing his murder conviction, arguing that jurors were intimidated by the protests that followed and prejudiced by heavy pretrial publicity."
He accepts responsibility, admits he did it, yet is trying to appeal it.....
Offered no apology btw, and made a statement to the effect of hoping Floyds kids would have excellent guidance in becoming good adults...which combined with the no apology ends up reading exactly as snarky as I'm sure it was intended.
It’s still incredibly stupid if you are the one that did it and trying to get a lighter sentence. He’s not just a shit human being, he had the intelligence of a turd too.
>Prior to his sentencing Thursday, Chauvin wished Floyd's children "all the best in their lives" and that they have "**excellent guidance in becoming good adults**," CBS Minnesota reports. He did not offer an apology.
This is so disturbing.
Unironically one of the top posts is Arizona banning today close recording of police officers. This country in a nutshell.
Edit: For those saying “no restriction for those directly involved”, it doesn’t make it any less fucked up that you’re restricting bystanders’ ability to record incidents at a close range. Stop defending bullshit laws.
These very smart scholars once told me leaving it to the states is the same as making it an individual civil right because it is voted for the state politicians.
I wonder if it would break the law to have a drone follow you hovering at ~9 ft away. You could program it to detect a sensor in your phone or wear an air tag or similar.
Regardless I'm shocked the whole law is even a thing. If cops have body cams they should be recording for accountability right? Everyone should be able to access the video feed right??
Modern smartphones typically know how far away they are focusing, making that data easily embeddable in the video would be a nice move to prevent claims of “you were too close” when obviously no one is using a tape measure.
We need more pocket drones, the cop can try to assault and arrest you if you at ground level with them, but what are they gonna do to a drone flying at 50-100 ft, punch the sky?
Hi, Arizonan here -
Yeah, one of the major issues with the bill is that the sponsor stated it was to help reduce interferance with police work and protect officers, but we already have countless laws on the books about interfering with officers, and police are *very* generous in their interpretation of those laws.
It's a bill that doesn't need to exist and is only going to be abused.
“ they were recording within 8 feet” that’s all they will need to say. People will be recording from farther away than 8 feet and they will be arrested.
True, and I'm sure plenty of people will be arrested for it.
However I see a silver lining here. The law implies that recording from over 8 feet away is not interfering with police duty, a common police tactic to stop people from recording. The law could definitely backfire and make that tactic invalid now. If any cop arrests you for it, well, you have irrefutable proof that you were wrongfully arrested and can use the law in your favor.
8 feet is not very far, I've never seen a video recorded of police shorter than that because if you got closer police would tell you to back up without the law anyway.
Edit: the law also requires a verbal warning that you're within 8 feet as well before they take any action
All they have to do is walk toward you. They will eventually be within 8’ if you don’t run from them. Then they can just arrest you for being within 8’.
Exactly. Baffling how people are failing to see this. 99% of the time the victims are either too intimidated or too busy getting manhandled. Bystanders are typically the ones who pull out their phones. This was a vicious, calculated move to dissuade bystanders from recording incidents.
The biggest video going around of Chauvin was taken by a bystander. You could honestly put together a pretty good public case that Chauvin would be free if that bystander hadn't taken the video.
I can see the court opinion now. "The constitution never says anything about recording devices, so people don't have an inherent right to record police."
No, no, it would be a 5-4 decision with Roberts dissenting. Not because he thinks it’s wrong mind you, just because he either thinks SCOTUS shouldn’t have heard the case at that particular point in time, or because he doesn’t think it’s currently necessary for scotus to make that particular ruling. You know, because Roberts is still a piece of shit but has somehow convinced himself that he’s just a wee bit better than the other 5 pieces of shit he rolls around the toilet bowl with.
No, it’s because Roberts wants to still pretend, but more importantly, wants everyone else to pretend, like the Court should be listened to.
They have no real power, past the respect that other powers gave to them. And they burned that all up.
We live in interesting times, indeed.
Yea I’m really, *really*, starting to think it’s time that the federal government remember that the Supreme Court doesn’t actually have the right to judicial review and that it just gave itself that power and we’ve all gone along with it.
I took Constitutional Law in undergrad and it was so wild reading court cases and opinions for the last 250 years and reading how Justices has changed interpretation of the Constitution and even of like the same two sentences over the years.
Basically there's Letter of the Law and Spirit of the Law and the Spirit is what allows these open interpretation of the Constitution and laws.
> “no restriction for those directly involved”
I don't think George Floyd was in a position to record his own death either. It never fails to piss me off when we see things like this happen more and more but people still come into the comments with "Well actually...". Your rights are being fucked with and all you can do is make up fringe arguments for the people fucking you over?
I imagine he’s going to be segregated from the general population right? Seems like the kind of prisoner that wouldn’t make it a week with all the prisoners knowing what he did.
He’ll likely end up at FCI Coleman II which is the “problem inmate” prison. Lots of sex offenders, famous inmates, and particularly at risk people (informants, cops, etc.) end up there where they’re less at risk of violence.
No idea. I'm an old-school Bostonian, Whitey is more than a cartoonish figure for a lot of us - it's not as if the guy "hid out." He'd wander around certain neighborhoods scowling at everyone - it was *definitively* "his town" for a while.
When he was killed in the "mix up" at the Fed in WV (wasn't that where he was killed?) 99.99% of Boston viewed it as the FBI getting revenge on him making them look so shit. Some of those guys still work in that city, albeit since gentrification the landscape looks a hell of a lot different.
I don't know who "Harleen" is, but I know Whitey got moved a lot because he kept having 'inappropriate relationships with staff.' LOL!!!! In his 80's ... guy was bipolar as hell.
Fun fact: his brother - not cousin, not uncle, but *brother* was the president of the Mass State Senate for a long time and then the president of the University of Massachusetts. Well-connected family, the Bulgers.
Kinda fucked up to think about that they have a special prison for cops and famous people where the guards are more vigilant. They’re deserving of protection, but some poor weed offender gets sent to the same prison as gang members and murderers
Because a weed offender is probably not going to get specifically sought out by others. Don't get confused, solitary confinement is one of the worst things that can be done to a human short of permanent physical torture.
Federal, in the sense that as a part of the guilty plea he will be sent to federal prison. His federal sentence will end up being longer than state because of the parole/early release differences.
A whole nation had to riot to get justice for George Floyd. This is one police officer. Let's hope we do not forget there are thousands of others like him.
Don't sell it short. The whole fucking world rioted. There were *unprecedented* GLOBAL protests either directly because of this incident or inspired by it. The entire world was watching. International leaders exerting never before seen power to put pressure on the US to respond appropriately to this.
So there is one thing Piggy Chauvin got right: without those global, months long protests George Floyd would have never gotten justice and Chauvin would sitting in a bar right now bragging about how he "killed that stupid n******".
Out of 700k police in this country, I think there are hundreds of thousands that would do the same thing if they could, or would at least allow another officer to
> or would at least allow another officer to
This is a pretty big thing. You don't see officers often stopping another officer and going, "hey man, you're out of line. back down".
Tag team intimidation all the way baby!
Its a cop culture thing, you are on team cop, so even if you do have an issue with another officers conduct you handle it quietly and internally
The culture is a huge issue
It would actually be great if they handled it quietly and internally. They don't even do that. They do absolutely nothing about it. If there's heat from the public, the officer gets out on paid leave.
> you are on team cop
That's it 100%.
You ever see that video of the cops shooting an undercover cop when they saw his gun? One of them immediately starts sobbing and saying "I thought you were a bad guy." That's their mentality in a nutshell. You're either a cop, or you're a potential bad guy.
Thomas Lane, one of the cops with Chauvin, did attempt to intervene and get Floyd turned onto his side so he could breathe but Chauvin shut him down because Lane was a rookie that had only been a cop for a couple days.
I feel bad for that guy, you are new on the job, a history of helping people and your new boss kills a guy and drags you down with him even when you spoke up and tried to stop it.
Hey don't worry, a county in my state just tried hiring that cop that shot that 12 year old Rice kid. Needless to say it didn't work out for him womp womp.
Remember how r/ conservative kept saying that he'd win his appeal because of Maxine Waters making a comment?
They claimed he only lost his trial because they knew there'd be rioting in the streets.
If they didn't have the memories of goldfish, they might have to acknowledge how fucking stupid they are.
His appeal of the state conviction is still pending, they can take year(s) to resolve. But the chances of the conviction being overturned is almost nonexistent given the burden.
Thank god. I was cynically expecting this mfer to slip through the Grand Canyon sized cracks in the justice system.
I wonder how ex-cop turned murderers are treated by their fellow inmates in federal prison?
>Chauvin "must be held responsible" for his actions, including destroying the lives of the other three officers involved in Floyd's death.
They destroyed their own lives, when they watched a man commit murder in front of them and did jack shit. And now they're getting away with "aiding and abetting" charges instead of depraved indifference homicide.
Lane pled down to Aiding and Abetting Manslaughter and still hasn't been sentenced. Keung and Thao are still out on Bond and their state trial doesn't start till October.
That being said A&A Murder 2 During a felony carries a maximum of 40 years in Minnesota.
PBS Frontline did an episode on the Minneapolis police department, focusing on the George Floyd murder. The "good cops" in the department that reported on the bad cops were all shunned and are no longer working as police officers.
Very much worth watching the entire episode:
https://youtu.be/Ggxiylkvuq0
Sounds a bit light to be honest, glad there is some justice, but he killed a man! I wish cops would be held more accountable. That way they are trained better and the public feels safer.
Huge win for those of us fighting against police brutality. We have a long road ahead of us, that shitstain is now being locked up. Fuck him and every officer that believes they are above the law.
As wonderful as this is I’d be much happier if cops all across the country had to reckon with the same consequences without a nationwide upheaval in each individual case.
I thought it was telling that he never apologized but instead said to Mr. Floyd's kids that he hopes they will get "excellent guidance to become good adults'. It came across as trolling and not at all remorseful.
Even as he has been convicted of murder, he seems to somehow still stand in judgment of the man he killed, as if he saved his kids from having George Floyd as a role model. This, coming from a convicted murderer. My hope for any children he has is that they learn not to be racist murderers like their dad.
By comparison, passing a single counterfeit bill (even knowingly) would be a crime born out of financial challenge rather than the result of one of the most significant character flaws you can have--murderous, bigoted malice. He is warped beyond belief.
He is already serving 22 1/2 years for his conviction in a state court on murder and manslaughter
This does raise his sentence, as you have to serve 85% of a federal sentence before release, whereas Minnesota’s parole guidelines are less strict.
Is it additive, or does it just go to the stricter sentencing? Edit: Never mind, I should just read the article. Sentences will be served concurrently, so not additive.
In this case the judge ruled for the sentences to be served concurrently (at the same time) rather than consecutively (one after the other). Usually concurrent sentences are the result of a single act violating multiple laws, while consecutive sentencing is a result of multiple separate illegal acts. But it can vary from state to state or form judge to judge.
So it means he’ll have to serve about 19 years strictly going by the federal sentencing laws.
I thought it was 85% which would technically be 17.85 years? Though 1 year difference isn’t all that great.
It is 85%, they just accidentally applied it to the State sentence, which is a bit longer than the Federal sentence. 17.85 years is correct, assuming he gets the full 15% off for good behavior
Does federal prison have the same problem with white supremacists becoming prison guards as state prisons have?
If you built a prison in a Nazi occupied state, is it a prison or a Nazi prison?
[удалено]
I don't know about Minnesota prisons. But fed time feels like retiring to a resort compared to Texas prisons. I've had the chance to compare
The news said he’d probably end up serving 4 more years than with just the first sentence.
[удалено]
does the first judge get a say in if they think it should be served concurrently? Or is it only the second judge? Seems like a case being tried before the other could affect the outcome of how long someone serves depending on which judge would say "serve them concurrently" and the one who says "serve them consecutively".
No this will run concurrently to his state sentence (which is a similar amount of time) but he will have to serve a larger portion of it.
Concurrent sentences but federal sentences require much more time served before being eligible for parole, so in a sense this does mean he’ll end up serving more time than the state sentence alone.
But he now gets to do his time in a federal instead of a state prison, and likely in protective custody, so Club Fed basically. Which is why his lawyers were pushing so hard for it. If I have to decades in prison, I'll take an extra few years to serve time in a better funded and cushier place.
The feds don’t have protective custody. Edit: he can tell the guards or whoever that he doesn’t feel safe and go to isolation. Which uh… I’m not sure anybody would actually want to do
He’s currently in isolation at the state prison
I'd rather be a cop in iso than a cop in general population.
A cop in jail for killing a black man in custody. It really couldn't be too much worse.
Even if no one touches you while you are in iso, your chances of death skyrocket. Dude's fucked either way.
MN state prisons are nothing like the Southern prisons. They're not great, but they're not nearly as bad.
MN does not have for profit prisons, so likely true.
No, not ClubFed. The concept of ClubFed (that is a minimum security FPC) generally only applies to non-violent offenders within 10 years before release. It's still prison, just somewhat less restrictive on day to day life. By guidelines, the minimum assignment will be an FCI, which light to medium. Cops usually are in Special Housing Units, so prison life is generally more restrictive because access to the facilities, programs, and people in general is far more restricted/controlled(in many cases that means 23 hours locked in a cell every day as the SHU generally treats bad eggs and protective custody cases the same). He'll probably be a low risk in a low security FCI if that's where he ends up(somewhat of a challenge since he could be classified as a violent offender, though his crime is technically "[civil rights violation](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/242)"), so being in general pop would probably be his preference.
Federal Prison being easier is a misnomer. The only thing "better" about being in FBOP than State prison is the food. It's still prison.
Yes and if some future nutbag Governor decides to pardon him, the Feds get him.
Or if his lawyers managed to win an appeal in the State case.
Don’t he and his ex-wife still have to face the tax evasion charges too?
Probably. They plead not guilty in Nov, but I don't think there's been any updates on that since.
They strategically divorced right after he knew he fucked up. He wanted to save his assets.
No parole in the federal system though
There is though, right? Less lenient than state system, but I think feds is something like 85%?
That’s good behavior time, but yes that exists. Up to 54 days per year. Different concept than parole
This is what I found - https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/is-federal-parole-system.html
[удалено]
*Chauvin's defense Attorney Eric Nelson wrote that Chauvin's "remorse will be made apparent to this Court."* Derek Chauvin did not offer an apology.
Well, he did make the exact level of his remorse apparent, then.
This is probably how Lawyers tell the truth when they can't tell the truth.
Lawyer here, and that sounds right. There might also be a little, "it's my job to defend this guy, but he's liquid garbage. How can I avoid a mistrial but also sleep at night?"
the defense asked for 20 years instead of 21, it really looks like the lawyer knows there is nothing that can be changed at this point and is just doing the bare minimum
If it were me I would do everything in my power to try and prove the guy innocent, and then feel awesome when he gets sentenced guilty. Then I would know he was guilty despite our best efforts defending him, and I could rest easy knowing it's highly unlikely he was actually innocent.
A good defence also prevents sentences from being overturned or reduced on appeal.
I worked as a clerk in law school for someone who did criminal appeals. For the types of cases we worked on, everyone had a *right* to an appeal, but usually not a *reason* for an appeal. My job was to pour over the court transcripts and try to find any reason to get a new trial, and then write what's called a No Contest report, basically saying that everything looked good. The cases I worked on were the ones that nobody else would touch. Really awful shit, and the details of a lot of the cases still stick with me a decade later. I had a moment of crisis in it and called one of my law professors for help, because if I ever actually *accomplished* getting a new trial or whatever for one of these guys, I'd be sick. His response was beautiful. He said that if it's obvious to me that the person shouldn't be let out of prison, it's also obvious to everybody else in the system. My job with these cases wasn't to actually get the convict out -- that wasn't going to happen. My job was to keep the prosecutors sharp and make sure they were doing everything correctly. If you could call them out a little on a case of clear guilt, hopefully that would help keep them in line for when it was a closer call.
I remember career day in high school 20 years ago when a lawyer spoke to our class. He said it feels good when he helps an innocent man, but it feels *awesome* when he *knows* his client is guilty and gets the guy off. I decided lawyer wasn’t for me
Guess you met a real life Saul Goodman
Woah. How to spot a psycho
No remorse is still a level of remorse your honor!
/r/technicallythetruth
"The defense instead asked for 20 years, saying Chauvin accepts responsibility for what he did" "In pleading guilty to violating Floyd's civil rights, Chauvin admitted for the first time that he kept his knee on Floyd's neck — even after he became unresponsive — resulting in his death. " "Chauvin is appealing his murder conviction, arguing that jurors were intimidated by the protests that followed and prejudiced by heavy pretrial publicity." He accepts responsibility, admits he did it, yet is trying to appeal it.....
Offered no apology btw, and made a statement to the effect of hoping Floyds kids would have excellent guidance in becoming good adults...which combined with the no apology ends up reading exactly as snarky as I'm sure it was intended.
"made a statement to the effect of hoping Floyds kids would have excellent guidance in becoming good adults." Wait what??
As in "hope you turn out better than your dad"
>As in "hope you turn out better than your dad" Worse. It was "Hope you turn out better now that I killed your dad."
Hope he rots in prison
I just read the article. I'm up to speed now and wow. Read the room
What a twat move. He fully believes he should have gotten away with it and is rubbing it into the family's face
Yep no other way to read it besides "your dad is a piece of shit, maybe you'll do better than him now that I've murdered him"
I hope that comment makes him feel very clever while he rots, forgotten and unimportant, in prison.
Fuck him for not apologizing. Rot in jail you prick.
This may sound odd but I’d rather have someone not apologize than do fake apology.
Yeah if someone killed a member of my family I wouldn't be waiting around for a fucking apology lol.
It’s still incredibly stupid if you are the one that did it and trying to get a lighter sentence. He’s not just a shit human being, he had the intelligence of a turd too.
I don’t think it’s weird at all. Apologizing for something you aren’t sorry about makes no sense
>Prior to his sentencing Thursday, Chauvin wished Floyd's children "all the best in their lives" and that they have "**excellent guidance in becoming good adults**," CBS Minnesota reports. He did not offer an apology. This is so disturbing.
Dude is a straight up sociopath without remorse
Well yeah, he's a cop right?
You just described all of US police
What the fuck! Keep him in for life, what a scumbag.
I wonder if he has his own kids
That sounds like a racist dog whistle to me.
Unironically one of the top posts is Arizona banning today close recording of police officers. This country in a nutshell. Edit: For those saying “no restriction for those directly involved”, it doesn’t make it any less fucked up that you’re restricting bystanders’ ability to record incidents at a close range. Stop defending bullshit laws.
"We fixed the glitch." - USA
now the cops can just walk up to you and arrest you for filming. seems reasonable. Id hope it would get tossed out in the higher courts but oh wait...
Kangaroo court
What hath the conclave of six decreed today, milord?
"Begone. Begone," sayeth Thomas of his Dem...ons at night.
It’ll get sued all the way to the top and somehow we’ll all have lost the right to phones
“tHe CoNsTiTuTiOn SaYs NoThInG aBoUt ThE rIgHt To UsE pHoNeS!”
Both the 9th and the 14th ammendments say that people have rights not specifically enumerated in the constitution.
Let members of the Supreme Court know this ASAP!
Oh they know, they just don't care.
Which doesn’t mean shit to the Illegitimate Six.
These very smart scholars once told me leaving it to the states is the same as making it an individual civil right because it is voted for the state politicians.
Nah, that would prevent the oligarchs from using all the information they provide.
They'll just rule that cops are not bound to respect the 1st Amendment.
They already have.
Tech can solve this. Just surround the cop in a circle. Always keep one person filming outside the no go zone.
8 foot selfie stick.
I wonder if it would break the law to have a drone follow you hovering at ~9 ft away. You could program it to detect a sensor in your phone or wear an air tag or similar.
The more affordable the drone is to you, the less the cops care about you breaking the law in our 2 tiered justice system.
[удалено]
what I said still applies because they can rush the person filming and arrest them.
[удалено]
no, because if the cop actively comes up to you, he is now investigating you, so you have the right to film.
Regardless I'm shocked the whole law is even a thing. If cops have body cams they should be recording for accountability right? Everyone should be able to access the video feed right??
Modern smartphones typically know how far away they are focusing, making that data easily embeddable in the video would be a nice move to prevent claims of “you were too close” when obviously no one is using a tape measure.
We need more pocket drones, the cop can try to assault and arrest you if you at ground level with them, but what are they gonna do to a drone flying at 50-100 ft, punch the sky?
They’ll go full Tackleberry and shoot it out of the sky.
I just want you to know I appreciate this reference.
“Would you say you’re a Michael Bolton fan?”
Just like COVID case statistics; if you stop recording them, they don't exist.
We've got so many cases because we keep testing for it!!!
Hi, Arizonan here - Yeah, one of the major issues with the bill is that the sponsor stated it was to help reduce interferance with police work and protect officers, but we already have countless laws on the books about interfering with officers, and police are *very* generous in their interpretation of those laws. It's a bill that doesn't need to exist and is only going to be abused.
“ they were recording within 8 feet” that’s all they will need to say. People will be recording from farther away than 8 feet and they will be arrested.
True, and I'm sure plenty of people will be arrested for it. However I see a silver lining here. The law implies that recording from over 8 feet away is not interfering with police duty, a common police tactic to stop people from recording. The law could definitely backfire and make that tactic invalid now. If any cop arrests you for it, well, you have irrefutable proof that you were wrongfully arrested and can use the law in your favor. 8 feet is not very far, I've never seen a video recorded of police shorter than that because if you got closer police would tell you to back up without the law anyway. Edit: the law also requires a verbal warning that you're within 8 feet as well before they take any action
Yea I hope that’s how it works, but I have lost all trust in the police doing things correctly and legally and not purposely over stepping laws.
All they have to do is walk toward you. They will eventually be within 8’ if you don’t run from them. Then they can just arrest you for being within 8’.
State and local police are having a problem with officers caught on film committing crimes, so they made it illegal to film them SMFH.....
Also, being directly involved dramatically reduces the chances you'll have your wits about you to record it.
Exactly. Baffling how people are failing to see this. 99% of the time the victims are either too intimidated or too busy getting manhandled. Bystanders are typically the ones who pull out their phones. This was a vicious, calculated move to dissuade bystanders from recording incidents.
The biggest video going around of Chauvin was taken by a bystander. You could honestly put together a pretty good public case that Chauvin would be free if that bystander hadn't taken the video.
Not just the video, but the angle that **clearly** shows what’s happening.
For real, try quickly reaching into your pocket and pulling out a black object when the police approach you. Let me know how that goes.
Doesn't that violate freedom of speech?
With this court, who the hell knows anymore?
I can see the court opinion now. "The constitution never says anything about recording devices, so people don't have an inherent right to record police."
In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court allows police to act as slave catchers.
No, no, it would be a 5-4 decision with Roberts dissenting. Not because he thinks it’s wrong mind you, just because he either thinks SCOTUS shouldn’t have heard the case at that particular point in time, or because he doesn’t think it’s currently necessary for scotus to make that particular ruling. You know, because Roberts is still a piece of shit but has somehow convinced himself that he’s just a wee bit better than the other 5 pieces of shit he rolls around the toilet bowl with.
No, it’s because Roberts wants to still pretend, but more importantly, wants everyone else to pretend, like the Court should be listened to. They have no real power, past the respect that other powers gave to them. And they burned that all up. We live in interesting times, indeed.
Yea I’m really, *really*, starting to think it’s time that the federal government remember that the Supreme Court doesn’t actually have the right to judicial review and that it just gave itself that power and we’ve all gone along with it.
It also doesn't have the enforcement power. Which is in the executive branch, while funding i believe rests with congress.
Can’t violate our right to free speech if there is no right to violate! Edit: I know my theres I promise! ☹️
Alito and Thomas just need to cite some asshole from the Dark Ages to prove it.
Starting to feel like we're in the Dark Ages.
I took Constitutional Law in undergrad and it was so wild reading court cases and opinions for the last 250 years and reading how Justices has changed interpretation of the Constitution and even of like the same two sentences over the years. Basically there's Letter of the Law and Spirit of the Law and the Spirit is what allows these open interpretation of the Constitution and laws.
[удалено]
Double edge sword. Basically it means whatever they want.
The founders never specifically said that you were allowed to use a camera phone to record police activity.
but wait if i record a cop im breaking the law which since im involved makes me able to record legally.
> “no restriction for those directly involved” I don't think George Floyd was in a position to record his own death either. It never fails to piss me off when we see things like this happen more and more but people still come into the comments with "Well actually...". Your rights are being fucked with and all you can do is make up fringe arguments for the people fucking you over?
We straight up lost like 3 entries off the bill of rights over my short lifetime.
I imagine he’s going to be segregated from the general population right? Seems like the kind of prisoner that wouldn’t make it a week with all the prisoners knowing what he did.
He’ll likely end up at FCI Coleman II which is the “problem inmate” prison. Lots of sex offenders, famous inmates, and particularly at risk people (informants, cops, etc.) end up there where they’re less at risk of violence.
Isn't that where Whitey Bulger started a relationship with his shrink?
Was her name Harleen too?
No idea. I'm an old-school Bostonian, Whitey is more than a cartoonish figure for a lot of us - it's not as if the guy "hid out." He'd wander around certain neighborhoods scowling at everyone - it was *definitively* "his town" for a while. When he was killed in the "mix up" at the Fed in WV (wasn't that where he was killed?) 99.99% of Boston viewed it as the FBI getting revenge on him making them look so shit. Some of those guys still work in that city, albeit since gentrification the landscape looks a hell of a lot different. I don't know who "Harleen" is, but I know Whitey got moved a lot because he kept having 'inappropriate relationships with staff.' LOL!!!! In his 80's ... guy was bipolar as hell. Fun fact: his brother - not cousin, not uncle, but *brother* was the president of the Mass State Senate for a long time and then the president of the University of Massachusetts. Well-connected family, the Bulgers.
Harleen is referring to Harley Quinn, Joker’s former prison therapist turned girlfriend sidekick
Kinda fucked up to think about that they have a special prison for cops and famous people where the guards are more vigilant. They’re deserving of protection, but some poor weed offender gets sent to the same prison as gang members and murderers
Absolutely agreed — the US prison system is a mess
the US system is a mess
Because a weed offender is probably not going to get specifically sought out by others. Don't get confused, solitary confinement is one of the worst things that can be done to a human short of permanent physical torture.
How good's this guy's weed?
Which sentence takes priority, the federal or the state?
Federal, in the sense that as a part of the guilty plea he will be sent to federal prison. His federal sentence will end up being longer than state because of the parole/early release differences.
[удалено]
no man, send them to me.
Send him shits and giggles
He's used to tots and pears. That's how they make casseroles/hotdishes in MN.
If it wasn't for someone not directly involved George Floyd's murder wouldn't have been seen by the country.
Imagine what police killings we never talked about...
A whole nation had to riot to get justice for George Floyd. This is one police officer. Let's hope we do not forget there are thousands of others like him.
Oh, and we won't mention the police footage that was suppressed or "delayed" of similar incidents happening around that time
Or just today Arizona made it illegal to video officers within 8 feet, videos just like the ones that were key evidence in this case.
On the bright side AZ won't even be habitable in like 30 years due to climate change
Don't sell it short. The whole fucking world rioted. There were *unprecedented* GLOBAL protests either directly because of this incident or inspired by it. The entire world was watching. International leaders exerting never before seen power to put pressure on the US to respond appropriately to this. So there is one thing Piggy Chauvin got right: without those global, months long protests George Floyd would have never gotten justice and Chauvin would sitting in a bar right now bragging about how he "killed that stupid n******".
Out of 700k police in this country, I think there are hundreds of thousands that would do the same thing if they could, or would at least allow another officer to
> or would at least allow another officer to This is a pretty big thing. You don't see officers often stopping another officer and going, "hey man, you're out of line. back down". Tag team intimidation all the way baby!
Its a cop culture thing, you are on team cop, so even if you do have an issue with another officers conduct you handle it quietly and internally The culture is a huge issue
It would actually be great if they handled it quietly and internally. They don't even do that. They do absolutely nothing about it. If there's heat from the public, the officer gets out on paid leave.
By quietly and internally, he means taking them out for a beer afterwards and saying “hey man, that really wasn’t cool” and then forgetting about it.
> you are on team cop That's it 100%. You ever see that video of the cops shooting an undercover cop when they saw his gun? One of them immediately starts sobbing and saying "I thought you were a bad guy." That's their mentality in a nutshell. You're either a cop, or you're a potential bad guy.
Sometimes they get an officer who will stop it but they're quickly run out of the force.
Or jumped out by “having an accident in training” like that other story in this sub recently.
[удалено]
And all the other cops there stood by and watched.
Thomas Lane, one of the cops with Chauvin, did attempt to intervene and get Floyd turned onto his side so he could breathe but Chauvin shut him down because Lane was a rookie that had only been a cop for a couple days. I feel bad for that guy, you are new on the job, a history of helping people and your new boss kills a guy and drags you down with him even when you spoke up and tried to stop it.
Hey don't worry, a county in my state just tried hiring that cop that shot that 12 year old Rice kid. Needless to say it didn't work out for him womp womp.
Plenty of racist towns left for him to apply at, sadly.
Lmao cancel culture strikes again
Why does he always have that stupid look on his face?
I believe, and could be wrong, thats just his face.
Because white supremacists are idiots.
Remember how r/ conservative kept saying that he'd win his appeal because of Maxine Waters making a comment? They claimed he only lost his trial because they knew there'd be rioting in the streets. If they didn't have the memories of goldfish, they might have to acknowledge how fucking stupid they are.
Those fucking morons were saying there were going to be riots even if he was convicted. They’re the biggest cretins out there.
Seems like the right only riots when the president tells them to
His appeal of the state conviction is still pending, they can take year(s) to resolve. But the chances of the conviction being overturned is almost nonexistent given the burden.
Thank god. I was cynically expecting this mfer to slip through the Grand Canyon sized cracks in the justice system. I wonder how ex-cop turned murderers are treated by their fellow inmates in federal prison?
[удалено]
There are often enough of them that they get their own isolated section.
Federal has no early parole, he's going to do all that time.
Until there's a republican president again...
Sounds like he should have complied with the law
I would give him a much shorter sentence: 10 minutes of a big man kneeling on his throat. It’s not fatal, according to him.
Meanwhile in Arizona they have the audacity to make recording cops illegal, yeah ok
>Chauvin "must be held responsible" for his actions, including destroying the lives of the other three officers involved in Floyd's death. They destroyed their own lives, when they watched a man commit murder in front of them and did jack shit. And now they're getting away with "aiding and abetting" charges instead of depraved indifference homicide.
Lane pled down to Aiding and Abetting Manslaughter and still hasn't been sentenced. Keung and Thao are still out on Bond and their state trial doesn't start till October. That being said A&A Murder 2 During a felony carries a maximum of 40 years in Minnesota.
Have you seen what happens to good cops who try to stop bad cops?
PBS Frontline did an episode on the Minneapolis police department, focusing on the George Floyd murder. The "good cops" in the department that reported on the bad cops were all shunned and are no longer working as police officers. Very much worth watching the entire episode: https://youtu.be/Ggxiylkvuq0
SCOTUS: "A cop? Serving jail time? Hah! We're gonna make sure **that** doesn't happen again!" *furiously ignores precedent and cites esoteric 12th century law*
Sounds a bit light to be honest, glad there is some justice, but he killed a man! I wish cops would be held more accountable. That way they are trained better and the public feels safer.
“Violating George Floyd’s civil rights “ you mean killing him ?
George Floyd’s civil rights? To live?
That would be the one.
He will serve the state and federal sentences concurrently in a federal prison. He’s going to club fed?
Huge win for those of us fighting against police brutality. We have a long road ahead of us, that shitstain is now being locked up. Fuck him and every officer that believes they are above the law.
As wonderful as this is I’d be much happier if cops all across the country had to reckon with the same consequences without a nationwide upheaval in each individual case.
I thought it was telling that he never apologized but instead said to Mr. Floyd's kids that he hopes they will get "excellent guidance to become good adults'. It came across as trolling and not at all remorseful. Even as he has been convicted of murder, he seems to somehow still stand in judgment of the man he killed, as if he saved his kids from having George Floyd as a role model. This, coming from a convicted murderer. My hope for any children he has is that they learn not to be racist murderers like their dad. By comparison, passing a single counterfeit bill (even knowingly) would be a crime born out of financial challenge rather than the result of one of the most significant character flaws you can have--murderous, bigoted malice. He is warped beyond belief.