I found that to be a VERY INTERESTING read. If that is the sum total of the story, I’d vote for acquittal.
Very different from what I thought I knew before reading the article.
Even if that is the complete set of facts, I also predict rioting after the acquittal.
Originally Posted by DanM
My training was consistent with yours from the sounds of it but the white paper referenced in the article is linked within. I haven’t had a chance to read it completely yet but it does appear to have been published by the American College of Emergency Physicians. Once I read it in its entirety I’ll have a better idea of whether it is consistent with how the article portrays it.
My posts only represent my personal opinion and do not necessarily reflect the opinions or official policies of any employer, past or present. Obvious spelling errors are likely the result of an iPhone keyboard.
One thing is for sure....Floyd's death had numerous contributing causes all of which should, and must, be considered during a fair trial. This incident did not occur in a perfect vacuum; any decent defense counsel is going to make great use of the points made in the article and I suspect, that just as with the Baltimore case involving Freddie Gray, the outcome will probably not be what the protestors and rioters are anticipating.
''Politics is for the present, but an equation is for eternity.'' ―Albert Einstein
Full disclosure per the Pistol-Forum CoC: I am the author of Quantitative Ammunition Selection.
Sam Harris weighs in. It truly is a brilliant podcast that cuts to the heart of the issues. I love his ability to balance all the stuff going on right now unemotionally. You may not agree with him, but he makes clear arguments that set a high standard for communication.
https://samharris.org/podcasts/207-can-pull-back-brink/
I AM NOT YOUR ATTY. I AM NOT GIVING YOU LEGAL ADVICE. I AM NOT LICENSED TO PRACTICE LAW IN THE STATE OF MN. ANY OPINIONS EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED ARE MY OWN AND ARE NOT THOSE OF ANY EMPLOYER, PAST, PRESENT OR FUTURE.
I find it curious that some are saying they would acquit or there would be a hung jury based on reading this one article and/or the public record to date.
Back to the "Medium" article:
Who is the author?
Is he or she an atty?
Are they licensed in MN?
How many criminal cases have the tried from beginning to end as a prosecutor and/or public defender and/or defense atty?
Re the nuts and bolts of this case:
How about we get a look/listen at the body cams from beginning to end?
Who is ultimately going to testify for or against who and for what hopeful result (dismissed and/or reduced charges, sentencing recommendation, binding plea or its functional equivalent etc?)
Who the assigned judge is now v. the morning of trial as that could have a tremendous impact on what and how the evidence comes in.
Who the judge is may have a significant impact re who the various lead attys will be and what parts of the trial they will present.
How big is the jury panel going to be? How many peremptory challenges is the defense going to get? Is that number total or are they shared? If they are shared, are they shared evenly or do defendants facing higher punishment get more? How many does the prosecution get? How does the judge view being dismissed for cause i.e. in some places in front of some judges, if somebody says they have a child care issue, that is cause, other times and places it is not...but do you want that juror who is not thinking about your case but the cost they are having to pay for the child care etc. IMHO, Jury selection is art as much as science and it is often choices between not so good and not so good too.
I have no idea about this one- How will COVID affect the entire process re masks, social distancing, what is dismissal for cause if a juror is demonstrably high risk and/or responsible for someone who is etc. Impact on the Court, its staff, indeed all parties involved.
How a case like this is tried in MN state court may vary wildly relative to federal court literally across the street or another state ct across a river or state line.
Preliminary Conclusion FWIW/YMMV Greatly:
I would respectfully submit that we only know a fraction of what there is to know based on the public record to date. It is far too soon to be able to reasonably predict how the criminal case is going to play out. We all should avoid falling victim to confirmation bias in this and other matters such as these.
Blessings to you all in this time. Be safe and well.
All valid points, with one note about the body cams. The author addresses the fact that they haven’t been released, and says they are an important missing piece of the puzzle.
The piece certainly raises some interesting points that have not been the subject of much discussion, at least that I’ve seen.
To your main point, all of the outcome determinative or influencing uncertainties and wild cards inherent in any given trial in any given courtroom will be present here as well. Uncertainties and wild cards are also present in any given football game. If your injured league MVP starting quarterback who wasn’t going to be able play suddenly finds himself able to play midway through the first quarter, the uncertainties as to the outcome remain, but the odds have shifted a bit.
One non-trivial question is "how do we find a jury for this that we can even pretend is impartial and doesn't have a pre-conceived idea of guilt or innocence."
I was into 10mm Auto before it sold out and went mainstream, but these days I'm here for the revolver and epidemiology information.
I'm reading the ACEP white paper and i'm not finding anything in the text that would justify prone positioning of a patient with excited delirium
The write-up on the site for the US National Library of Medicine / National Institutes of Health certainly does.
That surprised me, based on the information provided here.
It seems like a valid source of information… Is it?
Even if one or the other source is of questionable factual or medical evidence, it may very well be sufficient to raise a reasonable doubt as to whether the actions of the officer had any ill intent.
What I'm wondering is whether he can get a fair trial without the state or the judges capitulating to the public hue and cry. Because if the judicial system caves, we have nothing.
There's nothing civil about this war.
Reply With Quote