• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Black Lives Matter

Thats it and thats the point I made the other day. The problem is you say that and someone comes on and makes out your some Nazi sympathiser. People get so emotional that omit to read what you are actually saying and make up their own conclusion, probably based on who is posting. I have no doubt on that what so ever as it happens alot.
If you're not bowing down to the cause and have a different opinion then you're obviously racist

We have an Intracompany Yammer account and somebody today posted I'm sorry to all my black colleagues
I deleted Yammer straight away off my apps, happy for people to have opinions but I'm not having that on a work platform
 
Thats it and thats the point I made the other day. The problem is you say that and someone comes on and makes out your some Nazi sympathiser. People get so emotional that omit to read what you are actually saying and make up their own conclusion, probably based on who is posting. I have no doubt on that what so ever as it happens alot.
Happened to me recently.
 
If you're not bowing down to the cause and have a different opinion then you're obviously racist

We have an Intracompany Yammer account and somebody today posted I'm sorry to all my black colleagues
I deleted Yammer straight away off my apps, happy for people to have opinions but I'm not having that on a work platform

The difficulty I have is its such a hard subject to converse in, what can you do? I have been labelled it loads on here and alluded to it and had comments. I can't compete with what black people have gone through, no chance, not saying I can, but this is a forum to discuss and I might not convey what I mean as eloquently as others but I am by no means racist. I just like to discuss topic, I like to look at lots of views, how can we all learn and move forward.

If you are saying looting is not helpful you are defending slavery, its not the case, I care about the case, its the only reason I mention it. The points I make about society having less anger and more dialogue is not me saying its Black Communities fault. its about a path forward. I said it before and say it again, you don't move forward by looking back.
 
If you are saying looting is not helpful you are defending slavery, its not the case, I care about the case, its the only reason I mention it. The points I make about society having less anger and more dialogue is not me saying its Black Communities fault. its about a path forward. I said it before and say it again, you don't move forward by looking back.
Agree with this
Have seen lots of video's of peaceful powerful protests and these are fantastic and moving
The clams smashing monuments, cities up and looting are not protesting for the cause they are scumbags out to get some free stuff and to fudge as much brick up as possible
 
Agree with this
Have seen lots of video's of peaceful powerful protests and these are fantastic and moving
The clams smashing monuments, cities up and looting are not protesting for the cause they are scumbags out to get some free stuff and to fudge as much brick up as possible

Im not making a sweeping generalisation however living and spending a fair bit of time in South London, there are large areas of socialist supporters in say Dulwich, they use their football team to promote this side, they study locally, etc. The irony is, and I know a few, the irony is most of these come from old money that allows them to live in Dulwich (you don't pay the rent there writing blogs part time), pay huge fees for study etc, these are likely to have links to the ancestral hardship than dockers from Tilbury.
 
Answers within your quote (bold-type)
I had drafted a fairly long post detailing why I disagree on a number of these points, when I read the news that the prosecutor has moved to a charge of Murder2. This troubles me greatly and does somewhat undercut the point I was making about independence.

Here is the link to the Minnesota statute on Murder 2. It's a little long-winded and has clearly been added to over time:
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.19

You'll see from parsing through, that unless there's some significant evidence that we don't know about regarding the officer committing a felony during the process, it's impossible to make that stick.

609.19 1(1) is the closest fit, but it states:
causes the death of a human being with intent to effect the death of that person or another, but without premeditation

Now intent is invariably difficult to prove, that's why prosecutors always go for Manslaughter (or in Minnesota, Murder3) as it doesn't require proving intent. It would require something like the officer being recorded on his dash cam saying "I'm gonna kill him" as he gets out of his car.

The clue here will be if the officer requests a bench trial. If he does, no judge will ever be convinced of intent based on the evidence we've all seen, and he'll walk.

It's also a little concerning that he's gone for aiding and abetting on the other officers. Again, based on how that law has always been interpreted, that cannot stick either.

Here's the relevant statute:
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.05

The relevant part is 609.15 1
A person is criminally liable for a crime committed by another if the person intentionally aids, advises, hires, counsels, or conspires with or otherwise procures the other to commit the crime

This bit isn't my opinion, it's that of a US lawyer, but notice how each verb in the above is something actively done by someone. "Just standing by and not stopping someone" is not covered under the statute. In his opinion, the law is always interpreted in that way - a person must actively contribute to a murder to be covered under the statute.

As I said further up, there may be new evidence that we don't know of making either or both crimes fit, but based on what's been released, the prosecution cannot possibly win - especially not at a bench trial.
 
If some of the things he has said tonight were said to him im pretty sure the person saying it would be banned.

Maybe a kindly mod can ask him to cool off a bit.

No idea how i am coming across as the bad guy
when i say that police officer is a murder but that people should not be held responsible for what happened 200 years ago. As for becoming more socialist as i got older, well maybe it was getting sick but i want to see a fairer world.

Some of these protesters do more harm then good for their cause.

You're not.
 
I had drafted a fairly long post detailing why I disagree on a number of these points, when I read the news that the prosecutor has moved to a charge of Murder2. This troubles me greatly and does somewhat undercut the point I was making about independence.

Here is the link to the Minnesota statute on Murder 2. It's a little long-winded and has clearly been added to over time:
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.19

You'll see from parsing through, that unless there's some significant evidence that we don't know about regarding the officer committing a felony during the process, it's impossible to make that stick.

609.19 1(1) is the closest fit, but it states:


Now intent is invariably difficult to prove, that's why prosecutors always go for Manslaughter (or in Minnesota, Murder3) as it doesn't require proving intent. It would require something like the officer being recorded on his dash clam saying "I'm gonna kill him" as he gets out of his car.

The clue here will be if the officer requests a bench trial. If he does, no judge will ever be convinced of intent based on the evidence we've all seen, and he'll walk.

It's also a little concerning that he's gone for aiding and abetting on the other officers. Again, based on how that law has always been interpreted, that cannot stick either.

Here's the relevant statute:
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.05

The relevant part is 609.15 1


This bit isn't my opinion, it's that of a US lawyer, but notice how each verb in the above is something actively done by someone. "Just standing by and not stopping someone" is not covered under the statute. In his opinion, the law is always interpreted in that way - a person must actively contribute to a murder to be covered under the statute.

As I said further up, there may be new evidence that we don't know of making either or both crimes fit, but based on what's been released, the prosecution cannot possibly win - especially not at a bench trial.

First of all, it is impossible for me to address the points you disagreed with in the post you didn't send, so we'll take that off the table.

There are a great many angles of this situation -and subsequent reactions- which deeply disturb me, from the somewhat odd notion I have seen suggested that racism is singularly an American thing, to the politicization of a murder. Before I go any further, there is no doubt that this trial and decision will be played like a chess match; as most high-profile murder cases are.

I am -as you will have noted- keenly aware of modern media. Equally, I am keenly aware of how easy it is to hide behind the statement that until "facts" are 100% present no opinion cam be formed. In the world of modern media it is easy to create confusion and endless doubt with the simplest of efforts.

Sometimes a bucket is a bucket.
Chauvin had ample opportunities to remove his knee and self from Floyd. He did not. Floyd died. Second-degree murder is absolutely correct. I doubt Chauvin sat in his car as they went to the scene thinking about murdering Floyd, however he initiated a situation where he had a chance to disengage from an action leading to death and he simply continuer.

Had Floyd been resisting arrest, don't worry, he'd have been tasered. Chauvin spent 8 minutes not removing his heft from a begging man's neck. He made a choice. The choice ended up with a deadman at his feet. Chauvin had restrained Floyd, and had three colleagues with him. There was no need to kneel on his neck for 8 minutes whilst ignoring Floyd's words about not being able to breathe. Apologies for the repetition but it is an important FACT. Chauvin made choices beyond the necessary scope of his work. A man died.

Chauvin's record shows multiple disciplinary issues, with all but one of the cases redacted. It it not a good fit.

The aiding and abetting does turn this into something else. One of the officers, Lake, did I believe question what was going on. Chauvin, the senior, basically told him to shut his mouth. I believe the officer questioning had a record of volunteering to help Somali youth. His life is in tatters because he didn't do enough. I think dismissal is fair but am not sure he can be accused of much more. Chauvin's partner on the other hand had a major role, especially as he probably had the closest opportunity to get Chauvin to disengage. I noted that his partner also has redacted disciplinary issues.

I believe -based on the indisputable facts we can agree on- that Chauvin is both psychotic and racist. I believe that he found himself in a moment where he was faced with a black man in a position of weakness. I believe he took full advantage of that moment and exercised personal judgement to ignore Floyd's pleas for help/that he could not breathe. He is in my view a murderous bastard.
 
I agree the decision makers have to make the major move, but it seems and this is not a dig at anyone, but within all the fury, all the articles, all the shouting, all the debates etc no one ever sets out how they would like the future to look like or how? The piece on here the other day did a great job of looking at the past as past that you are right, should not be covered up, but these people live now, with me and you, surely as the current it is also down to the communities that know better than anyone to engage on what changes they want to see. Even an Obama could not solve it because although being a black man in America he is do far away from the struggle to make a decision for the good of change.

There also has to be a want of change, we can sit here and debate but there also has to be a change to safety net that is used in some black societies that use the past as an excuse for criminality, not everything can be attributed to the slavery of pre 1830s. The examples of kids being found with large knives and older member of the community more worried about the police social distancing than the horror of the knife needs to change.

Education is a first. The most instant thing is to develop an extra layer of police who are essentially trained community officers that work their specific beats and get to know their area. Make their uniforms less oppressive and authoritarian, de-tool them to very basic items, have them operate as a more low profile element who can readily intervene between regular police and civilians if necessary and be part of their communities as beat cops the rest of the time. But they need to be educated and smart when it comes to social work and overall communication.
 
Thats it and thats the point I made the other day. The problem is you say that and someone comes on and makes out your some Nazi sympathiser. People get so emotional that omit to read what you are actually saying and make up their own conclusion, probably based on who is posting. I have no doubt on that what so ever as it happens alot.

No-one condones looting. But you also have to know that when the words "protestors" and "rioters/looters" get conflated, it is a massive issue.

The vast majority of rioters and looters are thanks to carefully organized and well-funded agitation groups who know exactly how to play the divide. This allows the "president" to get "tough on crime" and before you know it, he has a wave of support going into Nov. This script is not new...
 
If you're not bowing down to the cause and have a different opinion then you're obviously racist

We have an Intracompany Yammer account and somebody today posted I'm sorry to all my black colleagues
I deleted Yammer straight away off my apps, happy for people to have opinions but I'm not having that on a work platform

There is no differing of opinion on this issue though, there are no shades of grey.

If your opinion is different to those who believe black people have been oppressed, particularly by Police and that it needs to change, what's your take on it?

What am I to understand, that you think it's untrue? Oppression and brutality doesn't exist? Or do you think oppression is acceptable?
 
I've not seen anyone not there that there are issues with the police and how they have and continue to contribute to this.

What I don't recall seeing is you condem the looting, including the murder of an African American being murdered over a TV.
So, are saying that's right?
If not are you complicit?

This is a pathetic, snide little attempt at baiting me.. Black people being murdered is exactly what I'm trying to ask people to acknowledge as an ongoing problem, globally.

A black man (McAtee) was shot and killed by Police the other day, he was a local hospitality business man trying to feed protestors.

Looting is unacceptable. As mentioned further up by @thfcsteff, don't conflate looting with protesting.
 
This is a pathetic, snide little attempt at baiting me.. Black people being murdered is exactly what I'm trying to ask people to acknowledge as an ongoing problem, globally.

A black man (McAtee) was shot and killed by Police the other day, he was a local hospitality business man trying to feed protestors.

Looting is unacceptable. As mentioned further up by @thfcsteff, don't conflate looting with protesting.


And you aren't baiting people?

I haven't seen one single person on here say that what happened to George Floyd, or indeed any of the deaths at the hands of the police or "concerned citizens", isn't wrong, racist, reprehensible and not a travesty.
But it would seem that's not enough and that unless we accept some personal responsibility we are all complicit.
Black lives matter, but it appear only black lives that allow a certain viewpoint to be espoused matter, others not so much.

There has a few posts mentioning divide and conquer, this is exactly what is happening.
While all this finger pointing and hand wringing is going on the powers that be are left to get on with doing what they do best, looking after themselves.
I think that it was @thfcsteff that originally spoke about the looters being not what they seemed, I agree with his observation, but not his conclusion.
By keeping us, the plebs at each others throats they distract us from the bigger issue. I would bet almost every one of us on here has more in common with George Floyd than we do the people pulling the strings.
Do you think they want us to realise that?
That the colour of your skin, the GHod you worship (or don't) your gender, sexual orientation or any other gonads doesn't matter? That ultimately we are all the same, with the same weaknesses and strengths, the same hang ups and hopes?
No, they don't, and they will do everything they can to keep us at each others throats.
Not overtly, but subtlety. And that is exactly what is going on here, the race card is being played, and not in the way most people think.

I don't want to go on much further in this post, so last point.
Check @Rorschach post about trump being hailed as the next coming. I will make the same comparison with them and George Floyd. I bet they have a lot more in with him than they do with trump. But they've been told different.
Who by, and why?
 
This is a pathetic, snide little attempt at baiting me.. Black people being murdered is exactly what I'm trying to ask people to acknowledge as an ongoing problem, globally.

A black man (McAtee) was shot and killed by Police the other day, he was a local hospitality business man trying to feed protestors.

Looting is unacceptable. As mentioned further up by @thfcsteff, don't conflate looting with protesting.

You're a sad, spineless person.

wow that’s very harsh.

I think it would be beneficial if you would take some time out to reflect on your recent posts and revert back to this forum on Monday.

Taking some time out has a calming effect and can change our perspective on things, often resulting in a softer tone.
 
Back