One example. Overall, the rate of police killings of black people is far higher than that of whites. You're welcome to your own opinions, but not your own facts.

.
.

Personally, my main concern re all these """racist cop shootings""" episodes is how the MEDIA picks and chooses the ones that may fit their narrative. It's like Marketing 101.

As some mentioned before in the USA there typically is TWICE as many whites shot&killed by police.

Has ANYONE here seen THIS reported by the Mass Media/Networks/Social Media??? Happened last week in GEORGIA>

Cop begs knife-wielding man in standoff: 'You’re a black man. I’m a black man. You don’t have to die today. I don’t want you to die today.'

“I’m begging you,” the sergeant pleaded with a knife-wielding man through a closed door after a 911 call about a reported prowler, WXIA-TV said. “You’re a black man. I’m a black man. You don’t have to die today. I don’t want you to die today.”

Officers begged 35-year-old Matthew Williams at least 47 times to drop the knife he had been holding after lunging at one officer, the station said.
But it was no use. Williams lunged again at police, shots were fired, and Williams’ body was recovered from the premises an hour later, WXIA reported.

And police said Williams lunged at an officer with what they described as a blue ceramic knife, the station reported.

An officer fired one shot, but police said Williams fled into the trees surrounding the house, WXIA reported, adding that an officer said in the bodycam clip that she may have shot Williams in the shoulder.
“Drop the knife, man!” an officer hollers into the woods.
“Drop the weapon! Drop it!” another officers yells.

“We will shoot, man, all right? We gave you ample warnings, all right?” an officer is heard telling Williams.
“Please come out for us, boss man. What’s the problem? How can I help you?” says an officer who identified himself as Sgt. Perry with the DeKalb Police Department.

After a minute, an officer kicks in the door — but it soon closes from the inside, WXIA reported.

“I’m begging you,” the sergeant pleaded with Williams, the station said. “You’re a black man. I’m a black man. You don’t have to die today. I don’t want you to die today.”

After another minute, police told the station, Williams lunged at them again with the knife just as one officer was heard saying “we’re here to help you” — and then three gunshots rang out.

The door closed again, WXIA said, and officers withdrew and waited for a SWAT team. Williams’ body was recovered from the house over an hour later, the station reported.
.
.


just one of (small) Media covering this story>Cop Begs Knife-Wielding Man In Standoff: ‘You Don’t Have To Die Today’ | Daily Street News

Wrong
 

Wrong! A little history lesson follows...........

The midnight raid, popularly known as the “Boston Tea Party,” was in protest of the British Parliament’s Tea Act of 1773, a bill designed to save the faltering East India Company by greatly lowering its tea tax and granting it a virtual monopoly on the American tea trade. The low tax allowed the East India Company to undercut even tea smuggled into America by Dutch traders, and many colonists viewed the act as another example of taxation tyranny.
Try again!

I believe we know enough by watching members of their organization who were seen crashing through the doors of the Capitol on January 6th. They might not represent the ideals of all Proud Boy factions, but how do you begin to separate the good apples from the bad?

Is it possible that because they are involved in more criminal activity...and running away or confronting law enforcement.

And the population in prisons is mostly what?

Suggesting there may well be a pattern.

:icon_bored:

Yes like them.

Looting and stealing has no place in "activism". NONE. ZERO. No matter WHO does it. Bogie you and I sit on different sides of the political aisle. But stealing and burning and ruining anything is WRONG and should not be protected by the First Amendment.

In the aftermath of the verdict, I want to share this video from Live PD showing one of my favorite segments.

Please watch Policing done right. Please see that it isn't about RACE.

Live PD segment. cop cries - Bing video

And I’m sure Tony’s family didn’t get $27 million

Wow! Can’t believe
You believe that!!

How many of those jurors do you think sat in that jury room and said to themselves if I vote to acquit on any of those charges I don’t want to be the one responsible for watching my city burn. The judge should have changed the venue and the jury should have been sequestered throughout the trial. Not saying innocent or guilty, just saying almost impossible to get a fair trial under those circumstances.

If nothing else, a public service is being provided by a lot of posts that exemplify the root of the problem and demonstrating how so many don't view people of color as even being human beings - deserving of equal treatment under the law.

If Floyd was white, this incident would never have happened.

Supreme Court Might Reverse Chauvin Convictions because of Maxine Waters

by Alan M. Dershowitz
April 21, 2021 at 5:00 am



The Minnesota appellate courts might not reverse the conviction but the United States Supreme Court well might, as they have done in other cases involving jury intimidation.

In seeking to put her thumb on the scales of justice, Rep. Maxine Waters perhaps unwittingly borrowed a tactic right out of the Deep South of the early 20th century.

In the Deep South during the 1920s and '30s, elected politicians would organize demonstrations by white voters in front of courthouses in which racially charged trials were being conducted. The politicians then threatened, explicitly or implicitly, that violence would follow the acquittal of a black defendant or the conviction of a white defendant. The U.S. Supreme Court and other federal courts reversed several convictions based on these tactics of intimidation.

The judge in the Chauvin trial made a serious error in not sequestering the jury during the entire trial.

Already, we have seen blood sprayed over the former home of a witness who testified for Chauvin; the defendant's lawyers have received threats. An aura of violence is in the air. Jurors breathe that same air....

This is not the Deep South in the 1920s. It is the "Identity Politics" of the 21st century. But the motives of the protesters are not relevant to whether jurors in the Chauvin case could be expected to consider the evidence objectively without fear of the kind of intimidation threatened by Waters.

The evidence, in my view, supports a verdict of manslaughter, but not of murder. Any verdict that did not include a conviction for murder was likely to be unacceptable to Waters and her followers, however, even if the facts and the law mandate that result. Waters is not interested in neutral justice. She wants vengeance for what she and her followers justifiably see as the unjustified killing of George Floyd.... That is not the rule of law. That is the passion of the crowd.

We must be certain that threats of intimidation do not influence jury verdicts. That certainty does not exist now in the Chauvin case, thanks largely to the ill-advised threats and demands of Maxine Waters and others.

The convictions of Derek Chauvin might not mark the end of this racially divisive case. The US Supreme Court might ultimately decide whether to uphold the convictions.

Congresswoman Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) made a statement — while jurors in the trial of former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin were not yet sequestered — which demanded street confrontations unless Chauvin were found guilty of murder. The trial judge correctly suggested that any conviction in the case might ultimately be thrown out on appeal, based on what Waters said. He condemned Waters' remarks in the strongest terms, but he did not have the courage to grant a defense motion for a mistrial. Had he done so, that almost certainly would have led to riots — which would have been blamed on the judge, not on Rep. Waters. So he left it to the court of appeals, months in the future, to grant a new trial -- which he should have granted.

The Minnesota appellate courts might not reverse the conviction but the United States Supreme Court well might, as they have done in other cases involving jury intimidation.

In seeking to put her thumb on the scales of justice, Rep. Waters perhaps unwittingly borrowed a tactic right out of the Deep South of the early 20th century. Though her motives and intentions were far better than those of the white southerners, the tactic is essentially the same. In the Deep South during the 1920s and '30s, elected politicians would organize demonstrations by white voters in front of courthouses in which racially charged trials were being conducted. The politicians then threatened, explicitly or implicitly, that violence would follow the acquittal of a black defendant or the conviction of a white defendant. The U.S. Supreme Court and other federal courts reversed several convictions based on these tactics of intimidation.

The judge in the Chauvin trial made a serious error in not sequestering the jury during the entire trial. Instead, he merely told them not to read or watch the news. That is not nearly enough; even if the jurors scrupulously followed the judge's narrow instruction, it is inconceivable that some of them did not learn what was going on outside the courtroom from friends, family, media and TV shows that were not "the news." It is safe to assume that many if not all of the jurors were fearful — either consciously or unconsciously —that a verdict other than the one desired by Waters and her followers would result in violence that threatens them, their homes, their businesses and their families.

Already, we have seen blood sprayed over the former home of a witness who testified for Chauvin; the defendant's lawyers have received threats. An aura of violence is in the air. Jurors breathe that same air, and the guilty verdict in this case — whether deserved or undeserved — should be scrutinized carefully by the appellate courts.

This is not the Deep South in the 1920s. It is the "Identity Politics" of the 21st century. But the motives of the protesters are not relevant to whether jurors in the Chauvin case could be expected to consider the evidence objectively without fear of the kind of intimidation threatened by Waters.

Both the prosecution and the defense put on effective cases. The evidence, in my view, supports a verdict of manslaughter, but not of murder. Any verdict that did not include a conviction for murder was likely to be unacceptable to Waters and her followers, however, even if the facts and the law mandate that result. Waters is not interested in neutral justice. She wants vengeance for what she and her followers justifiably see as the unjustified killing of George Floyd.

Yet, justice is not black and white. It requires calibration, common-sense nuance and a careful evaluation of all the evidence presented by both sides. There can be no assurance that this jury was capable of rendering justice without the threatening sword of Damocles — unsheathed by Waters — hanging over their heads. That is not the rule of law. That is the passion of the crowd.

We must do a better job of insulating jurors from outside influences in racially charged cases. We must be certain that threats of intimidation do not influence jury verdicts. That certainty does not exist now in the Chauvin case, thanks largely to the ill-advised threats and demands of Maxine Waters and others.

If Floyd were white, he would still be alive. Your above statement of charges would be moot since there would have been no murder.

These are my thoughts. Maybe they are wrong, but still, seeing what I have on the body cams, I don't think that Chauvin is guilty. The jury says yes, but I think that they considered all the rioting across the country that would have happened if an innocent verdict was issued and that was heavily weighed in their decision.
George Floyd kept saying "I can't breathe", yet he was breathing. As the defense said, that in order to talk you must breathe. Chauvin did use his knee to the neck, but it was to the side of the neck and not the windpipe. Floyd was on fentanyl and methamphetamine when he passed the counterfeit money and got arrested. He was foaming at the mouth when he was approached. That in itself could cause breathing problems.
Then there is the "race factor. The media and the left played that to the hilt. Too much publicity and left wing activism tainted the jury's decision.
Is Chauvin "innocent"? I think that he is complicit, yes. But murder? Not so much.

I don’t believe that at all. I think actions have consequences and in this case the officer was wrong to use that kind of force. If you believe that police officers kill people because they are black, does it also hold true that they kill twice as many white people a year because they are white?

This is the first step towards EVERYONE regaining confidence in law enforcement, particularly amongst people of color who have been singled out in the past.

We eliminated one very bad apple which is good for the entire system.

The three of you should read post #33...

There is never an excuse or justification to burn down and destroy people’s property and steal from their businesses. If you want to march in protest that’s fine, but I feel these incidents have little to do with “Justice” and more about destroying places and getting free stuff. Where is the “Justice” for people who’s lives and businesses are destroyed that had nothing to do with the latest case that’s used as an excuse to behave in this way?

"does it also hold true that they kill twice as many white people a year because they are white?"

You may want to research the per-capita ratio, in your misleading statement. Almost 5 times as many whites than blacks in this country, but only twice as many whites killed - tells a different story.

So you would have no problem if people who were fed up with with unfairness, inequality, etc..., burned your house down in the name of justice?

Chauvin Trail
 

This was nothing but politics. It was wrong what he did but he did not get a fair trail.
Put your self on that jury, would you have said not guilty knowing what would happen.

.
.
actually, Paul Harvey would tell "the rest of the story". It would include the %'s of serious crime nationwide, fleeing suspects, armed and dangerous perps - etc etc. by racial demographics.
.
.

Agree! There was a lot of media; a huge civil settlement before the criminal trial even started; rioting; incitement to riot by Maxine based on the verdict; and an overall fear for their own well being. I’m not saying he was innocent. What I am saying is that there could never have been a fair trial there given all of these circumstances and the tremendous pressure on the jury to vote to convict.

.
.
agree. and now, when this 'story' plays out and loses Media interest - it will be 'NEXT!!!' and the next one (if it fits their narrative) will be exploited.
.
.

The verdict was obvious. I could have told you before it was announced. It was trial by riot. Was anything appropriate? Of that I am not sure.

Imagine the judge. The sentence will be announced in six months. I am far from a legal expert but that seems not to be normal. Perhaps, the motive is to allow threat of riot to
cool.

Appeal? The judge himself knows it will be appealed. Will it be granted? That will be interesting to find the answer to that question.

Imagine being a cop today. Not sure how much that has changed. Do i really want to catch this guy? I worked in a bad neighborhood. Often the obvious answer was no.

Do you really want facts?!?
Fact: black males comprise 5.8% of the population in the US
Fact: black males commit more than 50% of the murders and burglaries in the US
Fact: whites are twice as likely to be killed by police as blacks
Not opinions - just facts...

What?
 

Rioting and looting have absolutely nothing to do with “the point of what justice is...”. And I “hate” that it is allowed to happen.

I am in agreement with your opinion.
Where I sit doesn’t matter on this.........

With all of the information on the jury, names, faces and how they voted. Who in their right mind would of voted any other way these people waiting outside of the courthouse would have erupted.

Would you?

For most of us, we can and do spin facts to support our point of view. I am amused that people's point of view changes when it directly effects them.

My sister, a liberal, repeatedly told me we should support illegal aliens. Hum, she is now playing a different tune. My niece was rear ended by a car driven by an illegal alien. Her car was rolled over onto her left arm. There was a chance she would lose her left arm.
She still has it but it is virtually useless. The driver of the other car did not even have a valid drivers license or insurance. The driver was not deported. Her father bought her another car and she was out driving again before my niece was out of the hospital.

Things are not perfect nor will they ever be.

I’m not sure what it’s the beginning of. It could be the beginning of police saying I’m not going to arrest that guy or I could end up in prison or loose my pension. Let’s see what the crime statistics look like in two years. No one knows where this is going.

It’s so obvious the jury was already to say not guilty even before they sequestered!

Agreed

.
.
THAT has ALREADY started across the USA. And as time goes on, LEO's could very well plug that into their initial decision-making when protecting us all and enforcing laws.

Like - 'He's running - he's 'of color' - nope, not worth it. and off he goes to be a repeat offender.

Can't blame them. I would not want to be a LEO, or anyone in family or friends nowadays. It's simply a no-win.
.
.

Things are quite different when you are there. We sit here in the safety of our computer room saying what should have been.

I lived in a city housing project till I was 13. My dad an injured WWII vet increased his income through hard work. By high school we had moved in to a upper middle class neighborhood. I recall in high school 1968, the subject of race, came up. The riots were not where we lived but in the cities. I offered a tour of where I used to live. Of course,
I was shut up.

How many times do we hear people say I don't go there. I have lived there and was glad to get out.

Simply - “BS” to simplistic thinking from simple minds!

Exactly. The police are told to look the other way while people who put their life savings and blood sweat and tears into building their businesses had everything destroyed.

Still amazed that black leadership does not point out that the rioters and looters are destroying the jobs that many of their people worked at.

Nothing at all wrong with peaceful protest but no excuse for what happened after the murder.