You miss the point... Dude has not been on the "streets" for almost 3 decades. 3/4 of George Floyds life. And his credibility in terms of excessive force are still as valid? Cmon man, excessive force is best detailed by someone who regularly uses it, not some so called "behind the scenes expert that never uses it"
He's there as the LT in charge of that particular crime scene, not a use of force expert. Defense clarified that when it comes to use of force training, he's a student not a trainer. He goes through the same training every other Officer gets every year, he certainly doesn't know any less.
If he was lying, it's stupid to have Court rules prevent that from being challenged so false ideas sink into the Jury over the weekend.
From what i saw, I thought the defense lawyer did a good job pointing out the nature of his work vs his testimony. Tough case anyway you look at it but I thought that interaction was won by the defense.. Not a lawyer and therefore this message can not be perceived as legal guidance lol.
This is my basic point, it's a tough case. Everybody seems to think it's open and shut, on both sides. I can understand having strong opinions for almost a year with no new evidence, but evidence is coming out now.
I hope everything this LT said gets thrown out based on the "maximal restraint" they had GF in being in their manual. (Assuming it is) if LT is willing to straight up LIE about that, prosecution needs to establish everything he said from somebody else.
I don't think what he said will be thrown out based on 35 years of experience, more than anyone else in the city. Seems like a strange idea people here are advancing.
all off? What the heck are you talking about, i listened to his testimony and thats where the numbers came from. It would be better if you were not so critical of every little thing..
The numbers are more like 8 years as a detective out of a 39 year career in law enforcement. With the most recent 10+ year string being involved every time anyone gets hurt or killed when someone is taken into custody, or fails trying. Meaning he's been personally involved with more such cases than any cop on the street, and responsible for all of them in his precinct in terms of supervision and training.
Quite different from what people here are saying.
Downvotes mean people are misinformed, biased to the point of being impervious to fact, or something; none of which is good.
We'll need to keep our mental faculties and stick together if we're to have any hope through the bs that's coming. And I mean WAY past this trial ...
That might be relevant had a taser been used.
You miss the point... Dude has not been on the "streets" for almost 3 decades. 3/4 of George Floyds life. And his credibility in terms of excessive force are still as valid? Cmon man, excessive force is best detailed by someone who regularly uses it, not some so called "behind the scenes expert that never uses it"
He's there as the LT in charge of that particular crime scene, not a use of force expert. Defense clarified that when it comes to use of force training, he's a student not a trainer. He goes through the same training every other Officer gets every year, he certainly doesn't know any less.
If he was lying, it's stupid to have Court rules prevent that from being challenged so false ideas sink into the Jury over the weekend.
From what i saw, I thought the defense lawyer did a good job pointing out the nature of his work vs his testimony. Tough case anyway you look at it but I thought that interaction was won by the defense.. Not a lawyer and therefore this message can not be perceived as legal guidance lol.
This is my basic point, it's a tough case. Everybody seems to think it's open and shut, on both sides. I can understand having strong opinions for almost a year with no new evidence, but evidence is coming out now.
I hope everything this LT said gets thrown out based on the "maximal restraint" they had GF in being in their manual. (Assuming it is) if LT is willing to straight up LIE about that, prosecution needs to establish everything he said from somebody else.
I don't think what he said will be thrown out based on 35 years of experience, more than anyone else in the city. Seems like a strange idea people here are advancing.
It would be better if you reviewed his service record, your numbers are all off.
all off? What the heck are you talking about, i listened to his testimony and thats where the numbers came from. It would be better if you were not so critical of every little thing..
Do your down votes tell you anything?
The numbers are more like 8 years as a detective out of a 39 year career in law enforcement. With the most recent 10+ year string being involved every time anyone gets hurt or killed when someone is taken into custody, or fails trying. Meaning he's been personally involved with more such cases than any cop on the street, and responsible for all of them in his precinct in terms of supervision and training.
Quite different from what people here are saying.
Downvotes mean people are misinformed, biased to the point of being impervious to fact, or something; none of which is good.
We'll need to keep our mental faculties and stick together if we're to have any hope through the bs that's coming. And I mean WAY past this trial ...