A generally misunderstood aspect of the Chauvin prosecution is the application of the felony murder rule. The jury did not find, and was not asked to find, that Chauvin intended to kill George Floyd. Felony murder simply means that you unintentionally cause a death while committing a separate felony offense. To prove murder in the second degree under the felony murder rule, the prosecution had to prove (paraphrasing from the jury instructions for clarity):
(1) that George Floyd died;
(2) that Chauvin's actions "were a substantial causal factor in causing the death of George Floyd"; and
(3) that at the time of committing acts that were a "substantial causal factor" in George Floyd's death, Chauvin was committing Assault in the Third Degree, a felony offense.
To prove assault in the third degree, in turn, the prosecution had to prove that (1) Chauvin intentionally inflicted bodily harm on George Floyd using unlawful force, and (2) the bodily harm inflicted was "substantial," regardless of whether Chauvin intended for the bodily harm to be "substantial."
Bodily harm includes "physical pain or injury." Substantial bodily harm includes harm that "causes a temporary but substantial loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ," like a heart attack.
The key elements were (1) whether Chauvin's use of force was unlawful, and (2) whether Chauvin's use of force was a "substantial causal factor" in causing George Floyd's death.
With respect to the lawfulness of the use of force, the jury was instructed that a police officer may use the kind and degree of force "a reasonable police officer in the same situation would believe to be necessary," in light of "the totality of the facts and circumstances..." The jury's findings on this issue were informed by expert testimony from competing "use of force experts," i.e. retired cops whoring for one side or the other.
Civil libertarian groups - before they all became communists - used to rail against the felony murder rule on the grounds that it is unjust to convict someone of murder when they had no murderous intent. See, e.g., https://www.aclu.org/issues/capital-punishment/when-state-kills-those-who-didnt-kill. Applying the felony murder rule, courts have routinely upheld convictions when a crime victim suffered a heart attack in the course of a crime.
For instance, if you break into someone's home or rob someone and the victim suffers a stress-induced heart attack, the felony murder rule makes you a murderer, even though you had no intent to kill. You just wanted their stuff. Felony murder convictions can also occur from something like an accidental discharge of a firearm during a robbery, or your accomplice to the robbery deciding to go Pulp Fiction without your foreknowledge.
The prosecution never alleged Chauvin intended to kill Floyd. They also never alleged Floyd was asphyxiated by Chauvin's knee. Instead, they argued the kind and degree of Chauvin's use of force went beyond what a "reasonable officer" would have employed under the same circumstances, and Floyd's resulting distress, in light of his weak heart and the monster dose of fentanyl coursing through his system, led to a heart attack. In other words, all the prosecution really had to prove was that Chauvin was a bit too rough under the circumstances and Floyd died of a heart attack while Chauvin was being a bit too rough.
The way the media has portrayed all this has been, of course, deeply disingenuous. Even independent media has failed to do a good job figuring out and presenting what happened. Tucker Carlson recently was shocked, shocked to learn that the prosecution did not prove intent or asphyxiation. But this was known all along for anyone who was paying attention.
In short, this was never a "murder" under the ordinary definition of that word, nor did the prosecution ever allege it to be. Yet the media intentionally misrepresented the case to perpetuate this misunderstanding, capitalizing on the public's ignorance of the felony murder rule. This was at most an officer being a bit too rough with a man already standing at death's door. It should have been a non-story. At most, it warranted a paragraph in the "crime beat" section of the neighborhood paper.
Instead, it was exploited nationally to stir up hysteria and drum up support for race communism. BLM is a PsyOp. It is not organic. It's intent is to delegitimize the American experiment and use the causes of "equity" and "systemic racism" in precisely the same way the communists used the plight of the workers to seize totalitarian control. But you all already know this.
Thanks for the clear statement. What times we live in that a rando (sorry) on the internet understands and explains the situation better than those paid to do so.
Organized rioters, waiting for the call, who didn’t give a flip about Floyd. Were they hunted down and prosecuted like the guy who put tire marks on a painted political statement in the street in Florida? Were the organizers prosecuted under RICO and held responsible for the arsen, financial ruin, permanent physical harm and death? Why are the organizers of this not facing felony trials and long prison sentences? The arresting officer was fired and charged the day after Floyd killed himself.
You don’t even know what is the meaning of communism , you are just using the term to incite primal and visceral reactions . It s quite unfortunate for you start an argument on the wrong premises . You ended up wasting your time and the times of the readers , unless the like minded ignorants whicb are going to follow you regardless of what you say
Communism isn’t just a economic system it’s an ideology who’s sole purpose is complete revolution and destruction of the establishment of the society that it’s in so that wealthy elites can suck the life out of the people and rule over them as slaves
Communists are bad we understand that but the liberals and democrats in our country are not communists , and it s equivalent to what the liberals are trying to classify the other party as right wings extremists . Labeling people like that only incite visceral reactions and reduce the chance of discussions between society
Maybe they were late because they were responding to a drive by shooting; or perhaps another drug overdose. There are only so many ambulances to go around and oppress these communities with.
Great documentary. Perhaps the question should be, if we expend so many of our resources on these communities, but that generosity is met with hostility, persecution, mob violence and destruction of our justice system, perhaps we should start thinking about keeping the resources for our use, and separating ourselves. After all, why would they want to live in the midst of pure evil oppressors? Seems like a win/win as they say in business.
At the next demand for reparations, (on top of the constant grants and governmental and corporate largesse that whites are excluded from), perhaps a peaceful separation/repatriation should be negotiated in exchange for one final payment. I wouldn't hold my breath that Republicans have the stones to do this, but it makes perfect sense to start a negotiation.
(The Biden admin is also appealing the billions of grants made exclusively to "black farmers" as well. I am sure there are many many other such racial wealth transfers that we can point to - on top of the police, hospital, EMS and other resources we transfer every day.)
Great piece and great video.
A generally misunderstood aspect of the Chauvin prosecution is the application of the felony murder rule. The jury did not find, and was not asked to find, that Chauvin intended to kill George Floyd. Felony murder simply means that you unintentionally cause a death while committing a separate felony offense. To prove murder in the second degree under the felony murder rule, the prosecution had to prove (paraphrasing from the jury instructions for clarity):
(1) that George Floyd died;
(2) that Chauvin's actions "were a substantial causal factor in causing the death of George Floyd"; and
(3) that at the time of committing acts that were a "substantial causal factor" in George Floyd's death, Chauvin was committing Assault in the Third Degree, a felony offense.
To prove assault in the third degree, in turn, the prosecution had to prove that (1) Chauvin intentionally inflicted bodily harm on George Floyd using unlawful force, and (2) the bodily harm inflicted was "substantial," regardless of whether Chauvin intended for the bodily harm to be "substantial."
Bodily harm includes "physical pain or injury." Substantial bodily harm includes harm that "causes a temporary but substantial loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ," like a heart attack.
The key elements were (1) whether Chauvin's use of force was unlawful, and (2) whether Chauvin's use of force was a "substantial causal factor" in causing George Floyd's death.
With respect to the lawfulness of the use of force, the jury was instructed that a police officer may use the kind and degree of force "a reasonable police officer in the same situation would believe to be necessary," in light of "the totality of the facts and circumstances..." The jury's findings on this issue were informed by expert testimony from competing "use of force experts," i.e. retired cops whoring for one side or the other.
Civil libertarian groups - before they all became communists - used to rail against the felony murder rule on the grounds that it is unjust to convict someone of murder when they had no murderous intent. See, e.g., https://www.aclu.org/issues/capital-punishment/when-state-kills-those-who-didnt-kill. Applying the felony murder rule, courts have routinely upheld convictions when a crime victim suffered a heart attack in the course of a crime.
For instance, if you break into someone's home or rob someone and the victim suffers a stress-induced heart attack, the felony murder rule makes you a murderer, even though you had no intent to kill. You just wanted their stuff. Felony murder convictions can also occur from something like an accidental discharge of a firearm during a robbery, or your accomplice to the robbery deciding to go Pulp Fiction without your foreknowledge.
The prosecution never alleged Chauvin intended to kill Floyd. They also never alleged Floyd was asphyxiated by Chauvin's knee. Instead, they argued the kind and degree of Chauvin's use of force went beyond what a "reasonable officer" would have employed under the same circumstances, and Floyd's resulting distress, in light of his weak heart and the monster dose of fentanyl coursing through his system, led to a heart attack. In other words, all the prosecution really had to prove was that Chauvin was a bit too rough under the circumstances and Floyd died of a heart attack while Chauvin was being a bit too rough.
The way the media has portrayed all this has been, of course, deeply disingenuous. Even independent media has failed to do a good job figuring out and presenting what happened. Tucker Carlson recently was shocked, shocked to learn that the prosecution did not prove intent or asphyxiation. But this was known all along for anyone who was paying attention.
In short, this was never a "murder" under the ordinary definition of that word, nor did the prosecution ever allege it to be. Yet the media intentionally misrepresented the case to perpetuate this misunderstanding, capitalizing on the public's ignorance of the felony murder rule. This was at most an officer being a bit too rough with a man already standing at death's door. It should have been a non-story. At most, it warranted a paragraph in the "crime beat" section of the neighborhood paper.
Instead, it was exploited nationally to stir up hysteria and drum up support for race communism. BLM is a PsyOp. It is not organic. It's intent is to delegitimize the American experiment and use the causes of "equity" and "systemic racism" in precisely the same way the communists used the plight of the workers to seize totalitarian control. But you all already know this.
Thanks for the clear statement. What times we live in that a rando (sorry) on the internet understands and explains the situation better than those paid to do so.
yet we won’t leave our keyboards after this Beria “trial” in NYC…
Organized rioters, waiting for the call, who didn’t give a flip about Floyd. Were they hunted down and prosecuted like the guy who put tire marks on a painted political statement in the street in Florida? Were the organizers prosecuted under RICO and held responsible for the arsen, financial ruin, permanent physical harm and death? Why are the organizers of this not facing felony trials and long prison sentences? The arresting officer was fired and charged the day after Floyd killed himself.
The first time I heard the phrase Minneapolis, little Moscow, was when George Floyd was just a twinkle in an eye.
You don’t even know what is the meaning of communism , you are just using the term to incite primal and visceral reactions . It s quite unfortunate for you start an argument on the wrong premises . You ended up wasting your time and the times of the readers , unless the like minded ignorants whicb are going to follow you regardless of what you say
nadim farhat doesn't know the meaning of communism.
Communism isn’t just a economic system it’s an ideology who’s sole purpose is complete revolution and destruction of the establishment of the society that it’s in so that wealthy elites can suck the life out of the people and rule over them as slaves
Communists are bad we understand that but the liberals and democrats in our country are not communists , and it s equivalent to what the liberals are trying to classify the other party as right wings extremists . Labeling people like that only incite visceral reactions and reduce the chance of discussions between society
Four years drug-free!
Why were the medics so LATE to respond? Makes no sense. It was a set up to exploit. There are no coincidences.
In 2020? Medics were busy dancing on tiktok back then.
Maybe they were late because they were responding to a drive by shooting; or perhaps another drug overdose. There are only so many ambulances to go around and oppress these communities with.
Great documentary. Perhaps the question should be, if we expend so many of our resources on these communities, but that generosity is met with hostility, persecution, mob violence and destruction of our justice system, perhaps we should start thinking about keeping the resources for our use, and separating ourselves. After all, why would they want to live in the midst of pure evil oppressors? Seems like a win/win as they say in business.
At the next demand for reparations, (on top of the constant grants and governmental and corporate largesse that whites are excluded from), perhaps a peaceful separation/repatriation should be negotiated in exchange for one final payment. I wouldn't hold my breath that Republicans have the stones to do this, but it makes perfect sense to start a negotiation.
https://vdare.com/posts/new-york-state-2-3-billion-tax-funded-grant-to-improve-jfk-international-airport-is-only-available-to-non-white-or-female-owned-businesses
https://twitter.com/i/status/1792066706182971571
(The Biden admin is also appealing the billions of grants made exclusively to "black farmers" as well. I am sure there are many many other such racial wealth transfers that we can point to - on top of the police, hospital, EMS and other resources we transfer every day.)
They wouldn't want to risk catching cold!