Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

The_Yarichin_Bitch t1_itlv0ww wrote

Reply to comment by burningcpuwastaken in Former officer in Floyd killing pleads guilty to state charge by the-dasdardly-puppet

Good. Idk how any sane person can not say "I killed him by helping, even if I didn't know it, PLEASE send me to jail" due to sheer guilt alone and needing to have some form of atonement. I guess I can make assumptions but man I just... I don't get it...

26

IrishWave t1_itm7mbv wrote

I struggle with the opposite on the other three, esp. the rookie. If you take the cop aspect out of it and view this from the angle of soldiers, doctors, construction workers, etc. where a mistake led to a death, I could very easily see the reddit outrage going the other way (as it did when Italy was threatening murder charges against the scientists who failed to predict the earthquake).

I got fired at work and might go to prison.

What happened?!

My boss screwed up. I thought they were wrong and pointed it out, but they told me it was fine and to shut up. Boss ended up being wrong and now I’m in trouble for not stopping them.

So your boss made the mistake and ignored you after you pointed this out…why did you get fired?

If this situation played out at my company, I couldn’t even see the other three getting in trouble if they kept their mouth shut, let alone the rookie for knowing enough to speak out.

24

mces97 t1_itnbhbd wrote

Oh fuck that rookie. He had his gun out and cursed Floyd within like 5, 10 seconds of knocking on his window.

17

Xaxxon t1_itquaqq wrote

You left out the part where your boss was kneeling on someone’s neck while they struggled to breathe and then went unconscious and he didn’t stop.

This was not just some “mistake”. He killed him slowly and intentionally while people all around yelled that he was dying.

3

IrishWave t1_itqw4cv wrote

I’ll give you a real world example a buddy of mine had to deal with earlier this year.

Crew went out to fix wires on a telephone pole. One worker went up the pole to make the repair. That worker was not wearing the appropriate gear for working around live wires, and failed to follow policy around what could and couldn’t be touched when making this repair. They were electrocuted to death because of this. The rest of the crew, including the crew supervisor (blue collar team leader) weren’t properly paying attention and failed to notice either mistake even though they were all trained to do so.

Do you charge the rest of the crew with manslaughter for not following proper policies and intervening when a co-worker was dealing with a dangerous and potentially life-threatening scenario? If not, what would be your logic for differentiating the two scenarios?

2

Xaxxon t1_itr1m1p wrote

The difference is that you have a long time to observe clearly that the thing being done is very very wrong and is slowly killing the guy after it actually starts. No one is saying the guy should have recognized the possibility of danger when they started their patrol.

After it was clear to EVERYONE that they were killing the person, you would be expected to intervene.

If the guy in your example were slowly being electrocuted over the course of multiple minutes (I know that's really not a thing) and there were a "turn off the power" button right next to everyone and they didn't push it, THEN you talk about charging (ha!) the people with a crime. Even more if instead of a worker they forced a bystander onto the electrical lines and electrocuted him.

Also, and not really relevant:

> electrocuted to death

A bit redundant. "shocked" is the word for it that doesn't require dying.

2

IrishWave t1_itrbezb wrote

The two problems with this logic being the rule of law:

  1. You’re disregarding the inherent danger aspect. Line repair work is a far more dangerous job than being a cop, and exponentially more people die fixing phone/power lines than they do while getting arrested. Lineworkers are trained to know one wrong step can be an instant death and that there is no second chance if you mess up. It’s also not an instant mistake like you’re making it out to be. Proper equipment and precautions are supposed to be taken before the worker heads up to the wires, allowing for a similar window for others to catch the mistake.

  2. Somewhat combined with the above, this logic would suggest far more doctors, nurses, and pharmacists should be criminally held accountable for mistakes, especially if you’re ignoring the inherent/imminent danger aspect. Many of their patients are already worried about death, and they’d have far more than ~10 minutes of being told someone isn’t well to identify and correct a mistake.

1

Xaxxon t1_itrooeu wrote

This is not a “mistake”. This is callous disregard for human life.

I’m honestly baffled how you’re even able to come anywhere near equating these things.

1

IrishWave t1_itrrktu wrote

Who determines the difference between callous disregard and mistake and how do you write a law to differentiate the two? If you’re the spouse or child of the dead lineman, are you not going to be calling for justice because coworkers decided to chat about a football game vs. take 15 seconds to follow policy and look out for the worker’s safety?

This also isn’t nearly as black and white as you make it. We had a garbage truck driver in Philly kill a cyclist because they forgot to signal they were making a turn. Also had a train conductor in Philly approach a turn at too high of a speed leading to a derailment and several deaths. Student died at my college during a football practice because they went on a lift in high-winds and no one thought to tell them not to. In all three of these instances, you had plenty of people calling for criminal charges against everyone involved who didn’t view screwing around while driving a train through a city as anything less than a callous disregard for human life.

1

Xaxxon t1_its3ryh wrote

Having a long time after the murder began to easily stop the murder is how you differentiate.

It’s VERY simple.

Other things involve doing something dumb but it not being blatantly obvious that it would 100% kill someone.

The guy stood by while the cop took minutes to slowly kill the guy.

Holy shit. I’m done. You’re making me dumber by trying to argue these other things are anywhere near the same.

1

IrishWave t1_its8bf1 wrote

Do you even realize how narrow your ignorant definition is? You’ve somehow made this so specific that the cops in the Freddie Gray case did nothing wrong in your eyes while leaving it open enough for an overzealous DA to charge a doctor.

1

Falcon4242 t1_itmb72q wrote

Problem is, was he actually their boss? I thought he just had more experience, but was still their same rank?

−5

CoyotesAreGreen t1_itme7ag wrote

He was the training officer for one of them I think.

24

Falcon4242 t1_itmf3lx wrote

Yes, one was training the rookie, so I get that. But the other 2 were the same rank as the main guy, or am I mistaken?

3

dodechadecha t1_itn2blz wrote

All the officers on the scene were the same rank. Chauvin was the most senior officer but was not a superior officer. Chauvin was one of the FTO training officers for Kueng for a period of time while he and Lane were in field training, but that was months prior to the Floyd arrest.

3

BansheeGator2 t1_itn4yve wrote

The fact that Chauvin was their superior at any point in their careers creates a precedent that he would be their acting superior during this incident, especially when they are still pretty new with the dept.

If they truly did follow the chain of command on this, I wouldn't be surprised if their actual supervising officer would have responded by having them follow Chauvins orders since he was the only superior officer on site.

3

[deleted] t1_itogwyy wrote

[deleted]

1

BansheeGator2 t1_itoiay2 wrote

Yeah. They are just trying to have their cake and eat it too. Play military on the streets, but without any of the accountability that the military has. No requirements on rules of engagement. A simple "feared for my life" clears any cop of wrong doing, and the good ole boys network to cover shit up.

Luckily cities and states have begun implementing new laws for cops that require them to act against illegal orders. At least it's something in the right direction.

5

dodechadecha t1_itn8tgs wrote

I mean, yeah, its a difficult situation to be in but they didn't follow the "chain of command". Per MPD training and policy, the first car on scene (Lane and Kueng) are in charge of it until a superior officer, like a sergeant arrives and all assisting cars defer to the first car. Now in real life, yeah that's maybe easier said than done but they should have known they were in charge of the scene.

0

Odie_Odie t1_itme8p5 wrote

Superior, being pedantic derails the conversation and loses the point. A rookie is going to have a very challenging time changing the behavior of a senior officer and another officer.

A surgeon is not the "boss" of the nurses, scrubs and assistants that work under them either.

7

Falcon4242 t1_itmej0u wrote

I'm speaking more about the other officers though, not the rookie. Pretty sure the lead guy was directly supervising the rookie or something. But the other 2 were the same rank, no?

This isn't a "surgeon overseeing nurses" issue, this is "multiple nurses with experience killing a patient, but saying that the one who worked longer is purely at fault". Yeah, maybe the nurse who is still being trained can argue that, but the other 2?

4

Odie_Odie t1_itmf01w wrote

Oh, yeah, your right. He did say -especially- the rookie.

Yeah, I would imagine if a nurse, a nurses aid and a student smothered their patient to death, I would be disappointed if the RN and PCA weren't charged but also disappointed if the student were (assuming they were idling and not, like, being sadistic, or something)

−1

PlayfulParamedic2626 t1_itmwkga wrote

The justice system is made up.

Enough people protested and now it’s overcompensating.

It’s supposedly better than it is.

−5

Slapbox t1_ito46s7 wrote

I don't know that I'd say overcompensating. I'd say, not turning a blind eye.

5

TheTerribleInvestor t1_itogu3j wrote

Being an opportunist, he could have denied to avoid the consequences, but once unavoidable you admit.

1

Tholaran97 t1_itomq95 wrote

More likely he knows a trial won't go well for him and took the lesser of two punishments. No sane person is going to want to go to prison.

1