George Floyd murder / Derek Chauvin guilty of murder

Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese said:
Fine, but I think the protesters here are being played by agit-prop on twitter rather than having thoughts and opinions of their own. Essentially radicalised and polarised into mindless herd behavior evidenced by the quick replacement of BLM protests by waring factions of rw and misc anti-establishment idiots here.
Click to expand...

I think you are doing decent people a disservice - I think lots of people know about the inequality and feel it is time for change. Of course there are probably proffessional protesters but they turn up evrywhere and that exucse is always used to discredit the message, look at tuition fee protests, Nurses pentions and this same old arguemnt was probably used during the miners strike as well

The wider message is more important than a bit of vandilism, that is my view. You can't make an omellette without breaking eggs and all that.....
 
Blue Hefner said:
I think you are doing decent people a disservice - I think lots of people know about the inequality and feel it is time for change. Of course there are probably proffessional protesters but they turn up evrywhere and that exucse is always used to discredit the message, look at tuition fee protests, Nurses pentions and this same old arguemnt was probably used during the miners strike as well

The wider message is more important than a bit of vandilism, that is my view. You can't make an omellette without breaking eggs and all that.....
Click to expand...
I think decent people had mostly been squeezed out of the protests after the first few days. BLM didn't bother on the second weekend due to it being hijacked by rw extremists and the 'others'. I use that term because neither liberal or lw seem true tbh.
 
Blue Hefner said:
Ive been reading a book on this very subject. We are quite happy to promote activists(usually dead ones) from America, happy to highlight police brutality in America and happy to show prisons full of black people in America - it is a way of the U.K. saying that racism is a US problem rather than a U.K. one

The U.K. massive problems with racism, we just don’t like to admit it or certainly do anything about it

Re Mandela/Apartheid, I hadn’t realised the influence Cuba had on ending it

Re rioting - if I Mrs Hef got killed in Police custody I would probably smash few shop windows. Then we end up in a discussion about people V property. Black people used to be property, of course. Did they get compensated, no. Did the ‘owners’ yes

Black people are more likely to be sectioned. Black kids more likely to be expelled, black people are more likely to be stopped and searched, black people are more likely to be pulled over, black people are more likely to end up in prison etc. That are what they are protesting about and if a few statues get spray painted, a few tellies get nicked then so be it. This is about historical and ongoing, global racial injustice
Click to expand...

I don’t think that’s true. I think most people recognise that racism is still a problem in this country. The simple truth is that if you are white you probably don’t encounter racism on a day to day basis (save for those responsible for it.) There may be an element for many of ‘what the eye doesn’t see the heart doesn’t grieve over.’ However just because you don’t encounter it that doesn’t mean you aren’t aware it exists. The rise in overtly racist behaviour since the referendum has been most convincingly explained not on the basis that racism had gone away and returned in 2016, rather that the mindset never truly went away, and the referendum simply lifted a lid on behaviour that previously was not tolerated.

I test that hypothesis in the following way: what has been the overwhelming public reaction to BLM protests in the U.K.? I would say largely it’s been an acceptance that, whilst lobbing statues into the docks is not ideal, fundamentally the people were protesting about long term inequality and they had a point. I haven’t heard anyone saying ‘what they fuck are they on about, we don’t have racism here.’ What I have seen is a sad acknowledgement that, however uncomfortable it makes us feel about ourselves as a nation, we can’t deny the truth in the basic complaint the BLM movement makes. Even the ‘all lives matter/white lives matter too’ crowd seem in the main to be driven by insecurity (‘why are these people saying my life DOESNT matter’) rather than by overt racism.

Nor do I agree that looking at the US problem is a way of deflecting from the UK’s problem. It seems to me that to say ‘we don’t have a problem’ is just as inaccurate as to suggest our problem is indistinguishable from the US problem. The truth is likely to be somewhere between. If you are black in the U.K., you are more likely to be the victim of stop and search powers than if you are white. But you are also at much, much much less risk of being shot by the police than if you are a black American. One explanation for that is of course that our police don’t carry firearms as a matter of course. Another is that we aren’t America, and our demographics and social problems are different.
 
Chris in London said:
You’re right about Kueng, but a grant of bail subject to conditions that cannot be met is essentially a refusal of bail.
Click to expand...
Is it though? The three "accomplices" all had bail set on the same terms ($750k). Thao hasn't yet been able to post it; the other two have. Chauvin's is set at $1.25m. If they really wanted to refuse bail, wouldn't they have just declined the application completely?

BTW, I'm not looking for an argument. These are genuine questions as I'm interested how it works. Maybe the judge thought there was no way the other three would be able to get hold of $750k, but somehow two of them did.
 
Last edited:
Dubai Blue said:
Is it though? The three "accomplices" all had bail set on the same terms ($750k). Thao hasn't yet been able to post it; the other two have. Chauvin's is set at $1.25m. If they really wanted to refuse bail, wouldn't they have just declined the application completely?

BTW, I'm not looking for an argument. These are genuine questions as I'm interested how it works. Maybe the judge thought there was no way the other three would be able to get hold of $750k, but somehow two of them did.
Click to expand...
No it isn't. Chris is just trying hard to organize the facts to fit his world view.

That jab aside. Yes, the bail fees are high, but that's expected. Normally, bail is paid by a bail bondsman. However, the Suspect has to come up with a %tage of the money to give the Bail bondsman. Generally between 6-10%.

So very likely the cops ( and likely their Unions) came up with 50 to 75 grand. The bondsman pays the rest. When the accused shoes up for his case and the bail.money is returned. The Bail bondsman keeps the 10% paid by the accused.

It an archaic system. But it's what it is.
 
Dax777 said:
No it isn't. Chris is just trying hard to organize the facts to fit his world view.

That jab aside. Yes, the bail fees are high, but that's expected. Normally, bail is paid by a bail bondsman. However, the Suspect has to come up with a %tage of the money to give the Bail bondsman. Generally between 6-10%.

So very likely the cops ( and likely their Unions) came up with 50 to 75 grand. The bondsman pays the rest. When the accused shoes up for his case and the bail.money is returned. The Bail bondsman keeps the 10% paid by the accused.

It an archaic system. But it's what it is.
Click to expand...

Buffoon. You really shouldn’t spout shite about stuff you clearly don’t understand. Go away and learn the difference between a presumption and a burden that can only be discharged by demonstrating the presence of special reasons.
 
Chris in London said:
Buffoon. You really shouldn’t spout shite about stuff you clearly don’t understand. Go away and learn the difference between a presumption and a burden that can only be discharged by demonstrating the presence of special reasons.
Click to expand...
You are trying too hard. Below was your original opinion after finding out one of the officer was granted bail.
Chris in London said:
Without knowing the circumstances in which he was granted bail, no. Potential answers range from ‘because the US justice system is fucked up beyond recognition’ through to ‘there was credible intelligence of a threat to his life from other inmates if he was not granted bail.‘
Click to expand...
Again, anyone who had any inkling about how the American Legal system worked, would have known that granting bail was the norm. Clearly, you didn't understand this.

This is nothing to be ashamed or get pompous about. But rather than being an adult about it and adimt"Oh, I didn't realize granting bail was the norm in America. Why is that?'.

You instead resorted to throwing out insults, projecting, and fumbling around with legalese like
"Presumption, Burden and Discharged "' in an attempt to cover your original ignorance about what was normal in the American Legal system...

Now none of your later verbal masturbation or attempts at legalese can change what was obvious from reading your original post.. So stop it already. You had a misconception about how the system likely worked.. You got corrected. Put your big boy pants on and stop acting like a child.
 
Last edited:
Dax777 said:
You are trying too hard. Below was your original opinion after finding out one of the officer was granted bail.

Again, anyone who had any inkling about how the American Legal system worked, would have known that granting bail was the norm. Clearly, you didn't understand this.

This is nothing to be ashamed or get pompous about. But rather than being an adult about it and adimt"Oh, I didn't realize granting bail was the norm in America. Why is that?'.

You instead resorted to throwing out insults, projecting, and fumbling around with legalese like
"Presumption, Burden and Discharged "' in an attempt to cover your original ignorance about what was normal in the American Legal system...

Now none of your later verbal masturbation or attempts at legalese can change what was obvious from reading your original post.. So stop it already. You had a misconception about how the system likely worked.. You got corrected. Put your big boy pants on and stop acting like a child.
Click to expand...
The American legal system is rooted in English Common law. The English legal system has a presumption of bail which was a long-standing common law right, subsequently mandated by the Bail Act 1976.

The relevant provision with in the English Bill of Rights, which predates the foundation of your nation by about a century, was the precursor to the 8th Amendment.

Next you’ll be saying you invented television.
 
Chris in London said:
I don’t think that’s true. I think most people recognise that racism is still a problem in this country. The simple truth is that if you are white you probably don’t encounter racism on a day to day basis (save for those responsible for it.) There may be an element for many of ‘what the eye doesn’t see the heart doesn’t grieve over.’ However just because you don’t encounter it that doesn’t mean you aren’t aware it exists. The rise in overtly racist behaviour since the referendum has been most convincingly explained not on the basis that racism had gone away and returned in 2016, rather that the mindset never truly went away, and the referendum simply lifted a lid on behaviour that previously was not tolerated.

I test that hypothesis in the following way: what has been the overwhelming public reaction to BLM protests in the U.K.? I would say largely it’s been an acceptance that, whilst lobbing statues into the docks is not ideal, fundamentally the people were protesting about long term inequality and they had a point. I haven’t heard anyone saying ‘what they fuck are they on about, we don’t have racism here.’ What I have seen is a sad acknowledgement that, however uncomfortable it makes us feel about ourselves as a nation, we can’t deny the truth in the basic complaint the BLM movement makes. Even the ‘all lives matter/white lives matter too’ crowd seem in the main to be driven by insecurity (‘why are these people saying my life DOESNT matter’) rather than by overt racism.

Nor do I agree that looking at the US problem is a way of deflecting from the UK’s problem. It seems to me that to say ‘we don’t have a problem’ is just as inaccurate as to suggest our problem is indistinguishable from the US problem. The truth is likely to be somewhere between. If you are black in the U.K., you are more likely to be the victim of stop and search powers than if you are white. But you are also at much, much much less risk of being shot by the police than if you are a black American. One explanation for that is of course that our police don’t carry firearms as a matter of course. Another is that we aren’t America, and our demographics and social problems are different.
Click to expand...

Whilst there may have been positive reactions to BLM protests I have seen some pretty shocking stuff in response, even from some family members:

‘What are *they* moaning about, they drive cars and have phones like the rest of *us*’ was a particular low light as was using the picture of that poor girl who was stabbed by the women who has since been sectioned as part of some ‘all-lives matter’ campaign.....

I accept these may have been isolated incidents but I don’t think you have to look far to find similar - U.K. ‘doesn’t want to do anything about it’ may have been a little harsh, I also accept

Channel 4 have done a 2 part documentary called ‘The School That Tried To End Racism’. I watched it last night and amongst other things it is pretty Schlick what kids(year 7) have experienced and have to put up with already. Definitely worth a watch
 
So the people policing the non police zone have a shoot to kill policy. some disturbing reported quotes in the article.

Seattle police-free zone armed ‘security’ killed black teen driver, 16, and wounded 14-year-old passenger when they opened fire on their Jeep as it approached the barricades at 3am: Protestors claim they acted in self-defense, police say.

 
hedkandi said:
So the people policing the non police zone have a shoot to kill policy. some disturbing reported quotes in the article.

Seattle police-free zone armed ‘security’ killed black teen driver, 16, and wounded 14-year-old passenger when they opened fire on their Jeep as it approached the barricades at 3am: Protestors claim they acted in self-defense, police say.

Click to expand...
source?
 
Dax777 said:
You are trying too hard. Below was your original opinion after finding out one of the officer was granted bail.

Again, anyone who had any inkling about how the American Legal system worked, would have known that granting bail was the norm. Clearly, you didn't understand this.

This is nothing to be ashamed or get pompous about. But rather than being an adult about it and adimt"Oh, I didn't realize granting bail was the norm in America. Why is that?'.

You instead resorted to throwing out insults, projecting, and fumbling around with legalese like
"Presumption, Burden and Discharged "' in an attempt to cover your original ignorance about what was normal in the American Legal system...

Now none of your later verbal masturbation or attempts at legalese can change what was obvious from reading your original post.. So stop it already. You had a misconception about how the system likely worked.. You got corrected. Put your big boy pants on and stop acting like a child.
Click to expand...

oops.

you got schooled before I even woke up.

better luck next time.
 
Blue Hefner said:
Whilst there may have been positive reactions to BLM protests I have seen some pretty shocking stuff in response, even from some family members:

‘What are *they* moaning about, they drive cars and have phones like the rest of *us*’ was a particular low light as was using the picture of that poor girl who was stabbed by the women who has since been sectioned as part of some ‘all-lives matter’ campaign.....

I accept these may have been isolated incidents but I don’t think you have to look far to find similar - U.K. ‘doesn’t want to do anything about it’ may have been a little harsh, I also accept

Channel 4 have done a 2 part documentary called ‘The School That Tried To End Racism’. I watched it last night and amongst other things it is pretty Schlick what kids(year 7) have experienced and have to put up with already. Definitely worth a watch
Click to expand...

I don’t think that what you accept may be isolated incidents are necessarily representative of wider public opinion. There may be pockets of deep, embedded racism - just as there are deep embedded pockets of lots of other things - but in general terms I think there has been acceptance of the essential point that the BLM movement has a legitimate beef. We know racism hasn’t gone away, but there is at least a wide acknowledgement that racist attitudes are socially unacceptable. That is why people who hold variants of racist views (Islamophobia and antisemitism) often dress up what is actually racism to look like criticism of theocracy or Israeli state policy.

Still, each to their own. If your experience leads you to think the majority of people in the U.K. don’t think there is any racism in the U.K., thats what you experience tells you. Mine is different.
 
hedkandi said:
So the people policing the non police zone have a shoot to kill policy. some disturbing reported quotes in the article.

Seattle police-free zone armed ‘security’ killed black teen driver, 16, and wounded 14-year-old passenger when they opened fire on their Jeep as it approached the barricades at 3am: Protestors claim they acted in self-defense, police say.

Click to expand...

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/20/us/seattle-capitol-hill-chop-chaz-shooting/index.html

Police have tried to intervene and enter the area but were prevented from doing so by armed protesters.

Unbelievable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top