Skip to main content

Is Leftist Minnesota planning to Lose George Floyd Case like Rodney King Case for Riots before the Trump Election?


Today on The McCarthy Report, Andy and Rich discuss Keith Ellison’s appointment to the George Floyd case, the new charges brought against the former police officers involved in his death.
 [https://www.nationalreview.com/podcasts/the-mccarthy-report/episode-84-murder-is-murder/]
 
"Yup. Same with the ATL [Atlanta] case; the DA there is over-charging the cop with 1st-degree murder (pre-meditated) instead of involuntary manslaughter. The DA will lose that case and he knows it."

"Riots commence"
- Dad29


Is the leftist Minnesota State Attorney General Keith Ellison planning to lose the George Floyd case so the United States can have riots like when the Rodney King case was lost due to apparent legal incompetence or possibly for the political motive of triggering the 1992 Los Angeles riots during another Republican presidency?

Former Assistant United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York Andrew C. McCarthy III showed Minnesota Democrats may be trying to lose the George Floyd Case by filing for murder two instead of going for the winnable murder three: 

Prosecutors in Minnesota have filed an amended complaint against Derek Chauvin for the killing of George Floyd, adding a second-degree “felony murder” charge. This dangerously flawed theory could be used to portray any police restraint of a resistant suspect as criminal assault.

The amended complaint against Chauvin also re-alleges the two homicide charges originally filed last week: third-degree “depraved indifference” murder and second-degree manslaughter, both of which better fit the facts of the case while posing no risk of criminalizing the legitimate use of force by good cops...

...  While the point may be subtle, this is saliently different from the theory of third-degree murder — i.e., depraved-indifference murder. In the latter, prosecutors would concede that it was lawful in principle for the police to subdue Floyd, but argue (correctly) that their manner of doing so was recklessly indifferent to human life, causing his death. By contrast, the new “felony murder” count, spearheaded by Keith Ellison, the radical leftist state attorney general, puts police on notice that they can be charged with a crime — felony assault — for doing their job, which routinely involves physically restraining suspects who resist lawful commands.

Any experienced law-enforcement officer will tell you that it is common for suspects to resist arrest by lying on the ground, claiming to be ill, waving arms to avoid being cuffed, and refusing to be placed in a squad car. Cops, of course, may not use excessive force when that happens. They must, however, be permitted to use sufficiently superior force to detain and transport uncooperative arrestees. In Minnesota, thanks to its election of the new breed of progressive prosecutor who rails against the justice system’s purported institutional racism, police officers who use force in arresting dangerous criminals now run the risk that they will be the ones who face criminal charges.


There was confusion about second-degree murder in the media speculation leading up to Ellison’s announcement of charges late Wednesday afternoon. When word first leaked that Chauvin would be charged with second-degree murder, it was widely assumed that this meant intentional murder. This seemed a reach. There is immense evidence that the police were reckless in their handling of Mr. Floyd, but scant evidence that they intended to cause his death — as in, specifically formulated that purpose and acted to bring it about.

Most of the coverage did not note that Minnesota’s second-degree murder statute prescribes alternative theories of murder: intentional murder and felony murder. The new charges in the case reflect the latter theory. The complaints filed against all four officers concede that Floyd’s death was unintentional. Instead, they charge that Chauvin, with the other cops as accomplices, committed the felony of third-degree assault by physically restraining Floyd when he refused to cooperate in being taken into custody. Death is said to have resulted from this purportedly criminal act of assault.


Defense lawyers will certainly note that the new theory may have led to some sleight-of-hand by Ellison in drafting the charges. In the original complaint, prosecutors more forthrightly acknowledged that Floyd, while he did not threaten the cops, was uncooperative. For example, the original complaint states, “Mr. Floyd actively resisted being handcuffed”; in the amended complaint, that allegation has mysteriously vanished — we are now told simply that “Officer Lane handcuffed Mr. Floyd.”

Why the change? Because Ellison has changed the direction of the prosecution since taking it over. Originally, prosecutors were not concerned about accurately describing Floyd’s resistance, since their theory was that, no matter what Floyd may have done, the recklessly excessive manner in which he was restrained — with his ability to breathe impeded — established depraved indifference. But now, Ellison is alleging that the arrest and accompanying restraint of Floyd was felony assault from the start. To pull that off, he realized he needs to soft-pedal Floyd’s resistance. Otherwise, physical restraint by the cops may appear to have been reasonable, at least at the start; Ellison wants it to look unreasonable through and through, to the point of assault.


Competent defense lawyers will make mincemeat of this legerdemain, showing the jury how prosecutors massaged facts to make them fit their evolving theories. A case that prosecutors should win will suffer.
[https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/06/new-floyd-murder-charges-will-be-tough-to-prove-and-may-imperil-good-cops/]

Is leftist Minnesota planning to the Lose George Floyd case like the Rodney King case for riots before the President Donald Trump election?


Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Mass and the Church as well as for the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart of the Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of the Mary.

Please, pray an Our Father now for President Trump and our Church as well as our country now because this is the important fork in the road for the Catholic Church and the United States. Please, keep this intentions in your prayers.


Comments

Dad29 said…
Yup. Same with the ATL case; the DA there is over-charging the cop with 1st-degree murder (pre-meditated) instead of involuntary manslaughter. The DA will lose that case and he knows it.

Riots commence.

Popular posts from this blog

Fr. Chad Ripperger's Breastplate of St. Patrick (Modified) & Binding Prayer ("In the Name of Jesus Christ, our Lord and God, and by the power of the Most Holy Catholic Church of Jesus, I render all spirits impotent...")

    Deliverance Prayers II  The Minor Exorcisms and Deliverance Prayers compiled by Fr Chad Ripperger: Breastplate of St. Patrick (Modified) I bind (myself, or N.) today to a strong virtue, an invocation of the Trinity. I believe in a Threeness, with a confession of an Oneness in the Creator of the Universe. I bind (myself, or N.) today to the virtue of Christ’s birth with his baptism, to the virtue of his crucifixion with his burial, to the virtue of his resurrection with his ascension, to the virtue of his coming to the Judgment of Doom. I bind (myself, or N.) today to the virtue of ranks of Cherubim, in obedience of Angels, in service of Archangels, in hope of resurrection for reward, in prayers of Patriarchs, in preaching of Apostles, in faiths of confessors, in innocence of Holy Virgins, in deeds of righteous men. I bind (myself, or N.) today to the virtue of Heaven, in light of Sun, in brightness of Snow, in splendor of Fire, in speed of l...

5 Dubia Questions for 1P5's Steve Skojec & All faithful Catholics especially Francis is definitely Pope Cardinals, Bishops & pundits

Here are five really short and easy to answer dubia questions which hopefully aren't too complicated for Steve Skojec, publisher of the One Peter Five website, to answer. To make it really easy for the publisher of One Peter Five it has been formatted so that he only has to answer: yes or no. 1. Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales said "The Pope... when he is explicitly a heretic... the Church must either deprive him or as some say declare him deprived of his Apostolic See." Was St. Francis de Sales a Sedevacantist or a Benevacantist? Answer: yes or no. 2. "Universal Acceptance" theologian John of St. Thomas said "This man in particular lawfully elected and accepted by the Church is the supreme pontiff." Was John of St. Thomas for saying "the supreme pontiff" must be BOTH "lawfully elected and accepted by the Church" a Sedevacantist or a Benevacantist? Answer: yes or no. 3. Do you think that a "supreme pontiff...

UPDATE: Fr. Ripperger's Prayer Recommendation for the Election: He Calls It "The Most Efficatious Prayer in Crushing Diabolical Influence In the Area of Oppression"!

During a recent interview on the Grace Force Podcast on YouTube, Exorcist Fr. Chad Ripperger   provided updated information that the prayers he officially recommends  for the laity to say with regard to the election, President Trump and our country  are the two  prayers posted below.  https://youtu.be/UKrLr4jW0Eo First of all, it is very important to start by saying that the usual means of receiving merit and graces are of paramount importance. That is, remain in a state of grace, recite the rosary daily, attend Mass as frequently as possible, receiving frequent communion, and frequent confession.  Father Ripperger mentions that we should offer all these things up and ultimately to be praying for an "honest, fair, and just election"..."and "for Trump's protection."  He references his book,  Deliverance Prayers: for Use by the Laity,  and states, "there is a prayer, and this is the one that I'm going to recommend because it's the one...