Minneapolis PD Suspect Dies On Video While Handcuffed. FBI Investigating.

[HCM]

What he was being investigated for has absolutely nothing to do with his behavior leading up to being arrested, or the amount of violence he used in resisting. Maybe you're in a sheltered part of the country, but in the cities, it's pretty common for dumbshits to successfully escalate "hey, stop walking in the middle of the street, get on the sidewalk" up to resisting arrest and assault on an officer. They're not high, drunk, or crazy, they're just dumbshits.

BONUS ROUND FOR LE: Why are you walking in the middle of the street?

A: Because you want me to walk on the sidewalk, motherfucker!

I think you should tone it down a little and drop the hostility towards one of our resident prosecutors who probably didn't mean the statement in the way you're reacting to.

And, at the very least, LB is not only on the same team but also a respected forum member, and you should act accordingly by asking him to clarify before going off half-cocked.

@Wise_A

The basis for all modern case law in the U.S. relating to police use of force is the U.S Supreme Court decision in Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989).

If you want to speak about LE use of force in any meaningful way you need to be familiar with this case and it's application.

Graham was a United States Supreme Court case where the Court determined that an objective reasonableness standard should apply to law enforcement use of force in the course of making an arrest, investigatory stop, or other "seizure" of a person under the 4th Amendment.

The Court then outlined a non-exhaustive list of factors for determining when an officer's use of force is objectively reasonable, commonly known as "Graham factors" the first of these factors was "the severity of the crime at issue,"

So while any encounter can escalate, " What he was being investigated for" is material to the discussion.

[TCB]

Saying “blood choke” is like saying “shoulder thing that goes up”, it is just as uninformed and grating on the ears of people who know better...but I guess this is a general discussion area not a LE specific sun-forum. Erick and Chuck have both put down some very solid knowledge on the issues surrounding this UoF, understanding what they said would go a long way in helping make sense of this extremely tragic situation.

[LittleLebowski]

Saying “blood choke” is like saying “shoulder thing that goes up”, it is just as uninformed and grating on the ears of people who know better...but I guess this is a general discussion area not a LE specific sun-forum. Erick and Chuck have both put down some very solid knowledge on the issues surrounding this UoF, understanding what they said would go a long way in helping make sense of this extremely tragic situation.

The forum member that said “blood choke” meant no disrespect. He was asking in order to learn.

[TCB]

Understood, I wasn’t offended and am not mad, angry or outraged. Just pointing out some of the reason the comment may have been received the way it was.

[Erick Gelhaus]

The forum member that said “blood choke” meant no disrespect. He was asking in order to learn.

My take? One meant no disrespect and I think we had a positive conversation, the other has an agenda.

[LittleLebowski]

My take? One meant no disrespect and I think we had a positive conversation, the other has an agenda.

Yeah, I just saw JHC’s comment and I know him to be a good American.

[Wise_A]

I think you should tone it down a little and drop the hostility towards one of our resident prosecutors who probably didn't mean the statement in the way you're reacting to.

And, at the very least, LB is not only on the same team but also a respected forum member, and you should act accordingly by asking him to clarify before going off half-cocked.

I wouldn't say I'm being hostile at all. Certainly it was not my intention. I moved from a medium-ish city to what is, frankly, a sheltered part of the country. Plenty of LEOs up here raise the same objections whenever a case like this crops up--it's outside their experience. If they go to question someone over a nonviolent crime (like forgery, which is quite common in these parts), they can't conceive of a situation where that person shoves them back and tries to walk off. They deal with their share of violent crime, but to them, things follow a certain order.

The basis for all modern case law in the U.S. relating to police use of force is the U.S Supreme Court decision in Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989).

If you want to speak about LE use of force in any meaningful way you need to be familiar with this case and it's application.

Graham was a United States Supreme Court case where the Court determined that an objective reasonableness standard should apply to law enforcement use of force in the course of making an arrest, investigatory stop, or other "seizure" of a person under the 4th Amendment.

The Court then outlined a non-exhaustive list of factors for determining when an officer's use of force is objectively reasonable, commonly known as "Graham factors" the first of these factors was "the severity of the crime at issue,"

So while any encounter can escalate, " What he was being investigated for" is material to the discussion.

Yes. And what's missing is what occurred in between the dude being stopped, and the dude being on the ground. The video doesn't start at the beginning (like all good inflammatory videos), it starts in the middle or at the end.

If you have any information that this particular individual escalated the encounter, feel free to share it. I was opining on this instance and these particular facts, not custody and control of defendants generally.

I am not especially a fan of "'Maybe you're in a sheltered part of the country" by the by. I've worked multiple murders of adults and children as well as many use of force events up to and including multiple officer involved shooting incidents. You can disagree without condescending. I am not offended, just a general pointer for civil discussion.

Edit: As a few other members pointed out I am decidedly team-LE, being a prosecutor and having a dad, brother, mom, and grandfather all in law enforcement. Incidents like this raise my hackles so hard precisely because they further poison the well when the public is already so inclined by an all-too-eager provocateur media to hate law enforcement.

Sorry if I was interpreted as being condescending, but I was merely opining on the lack of facts. After an event that happened Monday evening, four officers have already been fired, which is pretty damn fast for any civil service termination I've ever seen. The autopsy report isn't even complete.

As for additional info:

*Call was a forgery in progress, with the suspect sitting on car, allegedly intoxicated
*Cops arrive, find him inside the car, tell him to get out
*Dude refuses, and then resists

And now Benjamin Crump is involved, which pretty much guarantees that this will be a shitshow. I think I already heard him describe this as a "lynching", which sure doesn't seem to do justice to actual lynchings.

Frankly, what aggravates me is the pervasiveness of video, and people's unquestioning faith in it. It's the worst form of information illiteracy. Which, to be clear, is not a dig on you, just a general observation whenever an anti-police video pops out.

[JDD]

Were you eavesdropping on me?

I watched it the same way I watch ISIS recruiting videos for safe weapons handling pointers. I am already imagining the next round of use of force training modules as some bright spark seeks to prevent this from happening again by mandating that LEO's provide individuals with stress cards prior to use of any hands on technique... Regardless of the fact that clearly, somewhere in the training process, what I was taught (and from the tone of this thread, more than a few others) and what was demonstrated in that video diverged widely.

[fixer]

Can someone explain why there was a need to kneel on the guy’s neck since he was already cuffed and on his stomach?

[Lester Polfus]

Can someone explain why there was a need to kneel on the guy’s neck since he was already cuffed and on his stomach?

Based on what I saw in the video? Not really. It's always good to let people explain their actions based on what they saw and perceived at the time, but some situations are certainly much harder to explain than others.