SectionC3

It’s an awful video and torgalski is probably going to get fired but this is not assault second. Flynn did not have to charge this case this way.

Why is he a douche?

I don’t think there’s a dangerous instrument issue here. I suspect this is the “elder assault” statue, which I think requires internet to cause physical injury and incorporates the age criteria. If McCabe was charged this way, it’s a joke. Torgalski is a reach on this one bc if the intent issue. Maybe they get torgalski on assault 3 or harassment. But assault 2 is reachy.

Yeah I agree. Intent to cause physical injury is part of that charge, right? (I could look it up, but not into doing that two minutes of work now.) I just don’t see it. I suspect assault third is a lesser includes of this assault charge, as might be harassment. Maybe they get torgalski on a lesser as part of a compromise. Charging McCabe with assault second based on what I’ve seen is ... odd. I like John Flynn A LOT. But this is not right.

You’re an American and you don’t know what a coup is. What’s your excuse? What you repeatedly discover that rock bottom has a trap door it’s not that hard to speculate that the best is yet to come.

How are anonymous dudes in white sheets burning crosses addressable under Shapiro’s ambiguous criteria? They cannot be named, and they have no articulable policy. Short response from you.

This is really insightful. Nicely done. I came to this board mostly to amuse myself. And, along the way, I have learned a few things. You know what the hell you’re talking about. I might disagree with some of your politics, but I very much enjoy reading your posts and I appreciate what you have written here. Very, very well done.

The country would be full of stinky piss. But we would be healthier for it.

Viewed through the prism of video I completely agree with you. In real time I see that part of the encounter like the part where the officer pushed the protester. If the officer gets the benefit of the doubt on pushing the guy (which may be the case) on the ground that the fast-moving situation might have been fairly characterized as a threat to officer safety, then I think you have to look at the part of the incident where the protester is on the ground through the same lens and ask why the police didn’t ensure that the guy who was a threat seconds earlier wasn’t completely eliminated as a threat (either through a zipcuff or through a quick inspection that confirmed the medical issue had eliminated any threat he may have posed). I don’t think we’re really disagreeing here. We just see the video slightly differently. Kind of like there might have been different perspectives on the ground yesterday. (*All of that said, the whole thing looks reprehensible to me and I have a hard time defending what the officer did.) All of this is true, but it overlooks the point that people are pissed off because the person supposed to be protecting the public killed a member of the public in the Floyd incident. That’s, of course, a very narrow view of what’s occurred here. I see Floyd as a tipping point or a match for frustrations, mostly related to the indignities of life as a minority in this country but probably in some small part related to the frustration of the pandemic, and here we are today. You do make a good point: we all need to chip in and be better in our own ways, whether it’s, among other things, being more aware of the indignities I mentioned and actually doing something about them, or being more proactive about the knuckleheads in our own community. I woke up curious about what you thought about the BPD incident from last night. Any thoughts?

Phone in the right hand, what appeared to be a police helmet in the left hand. I rewatched after your post and I didn't see anything that indicated an "reach" toward an officer's service weapon. That said, I appreciate that I watched it from a distance and that there is a remote possibility that the officer in question might have seen the movement only out of the corner of his eye and reacted accordingly. Also, I'm not concerned about not putting the flex cuffs on the guy. The point is that if he actually presented a threat to officer safety you'd think the police would have neutralized that threat instead of stepping past him. That part doesn't wash with me.

Twitter will say another clue in the mystery of why Rand Paul's neighbor kicked the crap out of him.

If the fetus was born alive, the fetus would become a "person" and that would "count" as the death of "person" under the eyes of the law. If not, then that instance of gun violence would not have killed a "person" as the term is established in the law.

They didn't know he was unconscious immediately. If he was such a threat, he should have been zip tied. For what it's worth, it looks like he was trying to return a helmet to the BPD.

Marty Lyons retired a long time ago! The medics got there pretty quickly. I don’t blame them for not breaking the line to treat. But if he was an aggressor they should have neutralized him with cuffs or restraint. Not a good look for the BPD.

And that is the point. It is an inconvenient truth.

Problem is that the use of force has to be justified. I just don’t see it there. If the guy was threatening officers he should have been dealt with immediately after he fell to resolve the threat.

He’s a public employee engaged in alleged public misconduct so the name is coming out. As for his fascism, I haven’t dealt with the guy in probably 15 years, but he is absolutely not what I would call any kind of extremist. When I knew him he was a very, very good person. I have no reason to believe that to be untrue today.

I think they were states, but point is you’re right about prompt medical attention.

The last paragraph is victim blaming. Sorry but it is. The citizen probably shouldn’t have been there, but that doesn’t justify what happened. (Audio may tell a different tale, but I highly doubt it since the citizen was left in place after falling. A threat would have been neutralized there.)

Agree to disagree. We’re arguing semantics. It was an application of force.

Aaron’s a pretty strong guy and he gave it to the citizen pretty well from what I saw.

It got there pretty quickly thereafter. That part looked worse than it actually was. Just no need to hit the guy whatsoever. That was not protect and serve.

Eggshell skull rule. You’re right.

It was unnecessary. Totally out of character for that cop. I couldn’t believe it when I saw the name plate. He’s probably going to get fired, and that’s too bad. But he did not have to hit the guy. At all.

No. It also doesn’t mean Trumpian fascists. Somewhere in between.