5 ms·

Dangerous? Yes. Did they know it would be fatal? I have no idea. It isn't clear that they were standing there with the intent to "keep watch while their colleag

Dangerous? Yes. Did they know it would be fatal? I have no idea. It isn't clear that they were standing there with the intent to "keep watch while their colleague killed him". I don't believe they knew he would die. That doesn't absolve them, but should they be arrested as accomplices to murder? It isn't clear!

ashtonkem 6y ago
The idea that kneeling on a restrained human’s neck for 9 minutes isn’t something they knew could lead to the severe injury or death of that person would be laughable if it wasn’t so chilling to hear you defend. If I owned a martial arts studio and I let a student do that, I’d face criminal & civil liability. Why shouldn’t trained officers of the law be held to at least that standard?
- 0xBA5ED 6y ago
  I'm not questioning if they should be held liable. I'm questioning if they should be arrested as accessories to murder.
  - ashtonkem 6y ago
    If you did 1/2 of what the other cops did, you’d already be in jail pending trial. If you’d done 1/10th of that to a cop, you’d be lucky to survive your arrest. Part of the outrage is how blatantly unequal the treatment of cops and and civilians accused of crimes are. It’s especially galling because not only are they given the power of the state, they are also given extra rigorous training in the safe application of force. If anyone should have reasonably known that kneeling on someone’s neck would be lethal, it would be the cops. Oh, and all the bystanders who clearly recognized what was going on. Apparently they’re more wise to the dangers of kneeling on a restrained human’s neck than the police are.
    - 0xBA5ED 6y ago
      >If you did 1/2 of what the other cops did, you’d already be in jail pending trial. The difference is, police are authorized to use violence so there are other considerations about whether it was mistake or malice.
      - ashtonkem 6y ago
        They’re authorized to use necessary violence; kneeling on a handcuffed man’s neck was not a justifiable application of force. I genuinely cant believe I have to explain that.
        0xBA5ED 6y ago
        They all didn't kneel on the man's neck.
        ashtonkem 6y ago
        Yes, that’s why I’m focusing on the word “accessory”. Don’t move the goal posts.
        0xBA5ED 6y ago
        I haven't. This whole conversation has been about whether or not the other officers present should be arrested and charged as accessories to murder. I said it wasn't clear.
        ashtonkem 6y ago
        You tried to change the standard to “all the officers didn’t kneel on his neck”, I just called you out on it. I do believe they should be arrested for accessory and face a trial by jury. It’s your right to think to the contrary, but your rationalizations about why they were willing to stand by and watch something that has deeply shocked the conscious of the whole nation is both disturbing and unconvincing.

ashtonkem 6y ago

The idea that kneeling on a restrained human’s neck for 9 minutes isn’t something they knew could lead to the severe injury or death of that person would be laughable if it wasn’t so chilling to hear you defend. If I owned a martial arts studio and I let a student do that, I’d face criminal & civil liability. Why shouldn’t trained officers of the law be held to at least that standard?

0xBA5ED 6y ago
I'm not questioning if they should be held liable. I'm questioning if they should be arrested as accessories to murder.
- ashtonkem 6y ago
  If you did 1/2 of what the other cops did, you’d already be in jail pending trial. If you’d done 1/10th of that to a cop, you’d be lucky to survive your arrest. Part of the outrage is how blatantly unequal the treatment of cops and and civilians accused of crimes are. It’s especially galling because not only are they given the power of the state, they are also given extra rigorous training in the safe application of force. If anyone should have reasonably known that kneeling on someone’s neck would be lethal, it would be the cops. Oh, and all the bystanders who clearly recognized what was going on. Apparently they’re more wise to the dangers of kneeling on a restrained human’s neck than the police are.
  - 0xBA5ED 6y ago
    >If you did 1/2 of what the other cops did, you’d already be in jail pending trial. The difference is, police are authorized to use violence so there are other considerations about whether it was mistake or malice.
    - ashtonkem 6y ago
      They’re authorized to use necessary violence; kneeling on a handcuffed man’s neck was not a justifiable application of force. I genuinely cant believe I have to explain that.
      - 0xBA5ED 6y ago
        They all didn't kneel on the man's neck.
        ashtonkem 6y ago
        Yes, that’s why I’m focusing on the word “accessory”. Don’t move the goal posts.
        0xBA5ED 6y ago
        I haven't. This whole conversation has been about whether or not the other officers present should be arrested and charged as accessories to murder. I said it wasn't clear.
        ashtonkem 6y ago
        You tried to change the standard to “all the officers didn’t kneel on his neck”, I just called you out on it. I do believe they should be arrested for accessory and face a trial by jury. It’s your right to think to the contrary, but your rationalizations about why they were willing to stand by and watch something that has deeply shocked the conscious of the whole nation is both disturbing and unconvincing.