Mills said the man ignored his calls to stop, but when the officer threatened to use his Taser, 24-year-old Khari Illidge turned, walked toward him and said, “tase me, tase me.” In a sworn statement, the deputy said he shocked Illidge twice because he’d been unable to physically restrain the “muscular” man with “superhuman strength.”

Other officers who arrived at the scene used the same language in describing Illidge, who a medical examiner said was 5-foot-1-inch and 201 pounds. They bound together his hands and legs behind his back in what’s known as a hogtie restraint, and later noticed he had stopped breathing. Illidge was pronounced dead at a hospital.

Mills said in his statement that he thought Illidge was “under the influence of narcotics.” The pathologist said Illidge’s toxicology report came back negative for any “known” substances. He initially ruled there was no direct cause of death but after reviewing police reports and body-camera footage blamed the cause of death on “excited delirium syndrome as a result of an unknown substance that he ingested.”

“Excited delirium” is a hotly contested term frequently used to justify police use of force, according to law enforcement researchers and experts. The term is not widely recognized by medical associations, including the American Psychiatric Association.

One of the term’s frequently cited symptoms is “superhuman strength” — a descriptor often applied to Black people. The term creates a hurdle for legal accountability in prosecuting officers, since courts typically defer to law enforcement in determining whether force was necessary, legal experts say.

A review of dozens of police use-of-force cases, including court records, depositions and police statements, by the Howard Center for Investigative Journalism at Arizona State University, in collaboration with The Associated Press, found numerous cases in which police officers stated that a person who died while being apprehended displayed “superhuman strength.”

Seth Stoughton, a University of South Carolina law professor who served as an expert witness in the George Floyd murder trial, says the term “plays into the racist trope” of a “scary Black assailant.”

The Howard Center sought interviews with the departments and officers named in this story. None responded.

ONGOING TROPE

Although “superhuman strength” became widely publicized around the 1991 police beating of Rodney King in Los Angeles, its origins date to the post-Civil War Reconstruction era.

White Southerners spread propaganda that characterized Black men as innately savage, violent and intent on raping white women. Writers and filmmakers perpetuated the myth. The 1915 film “The Birth of a Nation” characterized Black men as rapists and beasts and used that trope to justify lynchings while glamorizing the Ku Klux Klan.

The caricature fueled widespread violence. More than 4,400 Black Americans were killed by lynch mobs between 1877 and 1950, according to data from the Equal Justice Initiative, a nonprofit that provides legal representation to people illegally convicted, unfairly sentenced or abused in custody. Since not all lynchings were documented, it’s impossible to know their true extent.

The 1960s Civil Rights era weakened the “Black brute” caricature, as national media focused on peaceful Black protesters being attacked by police. But the “War on Drugs” and its target on communities of color helped resurrect the myth.

In a 2017 case in Arizona, Muhammad Muhaymin, a homeless man with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, was attempting to use a community center bathroom when police were called, according to records obtained by the Howard Center.

Finding an outstanding misdemeanor warrant for Muhaymin, all four officers attempted to arrest him by wrestling him to the ground. They noted in their official statements that the 43-year-old Black man had “superhuman strength.”

Muhaymin’s autopsy report said he was 5 feet, 5 inches and weighed 164 pounds. His death was ruled a homicide and, in 2021, the city of Phoenix settled a family lawsuit for $5 million.

Peer-reviewed studies on racial bias and perceived size have found that Americans demonstrate a systematic bias in their perceptions of the physical formidability of Black men. One found that white participants associated “superhuman” qualities with Black people more often than they did whites.

“Superhumanization is treating someone like a non-human,” Adam Waytz, a study author, said in an interview.

TRAINING ‘SUPERHUMAN’

Police trainers say the perception of “superhuman strength” stems from unexpected resistance not commonly seen in training scenarios.

“When you see something that’s abnormal, where a person would typically comply based on an application of force, and they don’t comply, or they seem completely oblivious to pain,” said Spencer Fomby, a national consultant with over 20 years of law enforcement experience, “I think that’s where officers start to use that terminology of superhuman strength.”

In California, Chinedu Okobi was carrying black duffle bags when he was approached in 2018 by a San Mateo County Sheriff’s deputy. According to a federal lawsuit filed on Okobi’s behalf, the deputy called for backup and was joined by four others who ordered Okobi to raise his hands.

The deputy shocked the 6-foot, 300-pound Black man multiple times with a Taser, and other officers piled on top of him. One officer said Okobi had “superhuman strength” — even though he showed no signs of resistance in dashcam and cellphone video. According to the coroner’s report, Okobi died from cardiac arrest following physical exertion, restraint and “recent electro-muscular disruption.” His death was ruled a homicide.

Frank Rudy Cooper, a law professor who directs the Program on Race, Gender and Policing at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, says how officers are taught to protect themselves puts them on edge and affects how they approach certain communities.

When “superhuman strength” is allowed as a use-of-force justification in court cases, such misconceptions make their way into the wider criminal justice system. “It is an unfortunate and dangerous thing,” Cooper added.

The post Myth of ‘superhuman strength’ in Black people persists in deadly encounters with police appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

ST. PAUL, Minn. (AP) — Closing arguments were expected Tuesday in the federal trial of three former Minneapolis police officers charged with violating George Floyd’s civil rights, with jurors to get the case after a month of testimony.

Thomas Lane was the final officer to present his defense, testifying Monday he didn’t realize how dire Floyd’s condition was while handcuffed, facedown on the street with Officer Derek Chauvin’s knee pressed to his neck — until paramedics turned Floyd over.

“What went through your mind when you saw his face there, once he was tipped over?” Earl Gray, Lane’s attorney, asked.

“Um. He didn’t look good,” Lane said.

Lane, J. Alexander Kueng and Tou Thao are charged with depriving Floyd of his right to medical care as Chauvin pressed his knee into Floyd’s neck for 9 1/2 minutes. Lane held the 45-year-old Black man’s feet, Kueng knelt on his back and Thao held back bystanders.

Kueng and Thao are also charged with failing to intervene to stop Chauvin in the May 25, 2020, killing that triggered protests worldwide and a re-examination of racism and policing.

Chauvin pleaded guilty in the federal case in December, months after being convicted of state murder and manslaughter charges.

The judge and attorneys have indicated closing arguments could take almost the whole day Tuesday. The jury will get instructions from the judge before deliberations begin.

The trial was nearing an end just as another major civil rights went to a jury Monday in Georgia. In that case, three white men are charged with hate crimes in the death of Ahmaud Arbery, the 25-year-old Black man who was chased and shot in February 2020.

In the Minnesota trial, prosecutors have argued that the officers violated their training by not rolling Floyd onto his side or giving him CPR. Defense attorneys have attacked the department’s training as inadequate and said have highlighted a culture that they said emphasized deference to senior officers like Chauvin.

Prosecutors said at the start of the trial that the officers stood by as Chauvin slowly killed Floyd in front of them.

They presented weeks of testimony and evidence about the officers’ training, arguing that they knew they had a duty to intervene to stop Chauvin, and that they knew they had a duty to render medical aid. They have argued that Floyd’s condition was so serious, even bystanders without basic medical training could see he needed help.

Defense attorneys have argued the Minneapolis Police Department’s training was inadequate. They also attacked a police culture that they said teaches officers to defer to their seniors, saying that Chauvin called all the shots at the scene. Lane and Kueng, both rookies, argued they deferred to Chauvin.

Lane testified that he asked twice if Floyd should be rolled over, but was rebuffed, and he held his position because an ambulance was on the way.

Kueng testified that Chauvin was his former training officer who had considerable sway over his career. He said he trusted Chauvin’s advice.

Thao testified that he was watching the bystanders and he trusted that the officers behind him were caring for Floyd.

At the start of the monthlong trial, U.S. District Judge Paul Magnuson selected a total of 18 jurors, including six alternates. Fifteen people now remain — 12 who will deliberate and three alternates. The court did not release demographic information, but the jury appeared largely white, with one woman who appeared to be of Asian descent, among the 12 expected to deliberate.

Lane, who is white; Kueng, who is Black; and Thao, who is Hmong American, also face a separate state trial in June on charges alleging that they aided and abetted murder and manslaughter.

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post 3 cops’ trial in Floyd killing heads to closing arguments appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

ST. PAUL, Minn. (AP) — Three officers on trial for allegedly violating George Floyd’s civil rights would have been trained to use the least amount of force necessary and had a duty to intervene against inappropriate force, the commander of the Minneapolis police training division at the time of Floyd’s killing testified Thursday.

Inspector Katie Blackwell said officers are required to try to de-escalate a situation and, if force is used, to stop once the person is no longer resisting, then render any necessary medical aid they’re trained to provide until medical personnel arrive.

Federal prosecutors say former Officers J. Alexander Kueng, Thomas Lane and Tou Thao failed to act to save Floyd’s life on May 25, 2020, as fellow Officer Derek Chauvin knelt on the Black man’s neck for 9 1/2 minutes while Floyd was handcuffed, facedown and gasping for air. Kueng knelt on Floyd’s back, Lane held his legs and Thao kept bystanders back.

Blackwell testified that it is critical to move someone who is being restrained from a prone position onto their side, otherwise “the concern is that they would die in custody.” Body camera video shows that Lane twice asked if they should roll Floyd onto his side but was rebuffed.

Blackwell went through department policy and the training required of all officers, and noted that Thao, who has been with the department since 2012, was certified in CPR and attended multiple hours of defensive tactics training, use-of-force training and crisis intervention training while he was on the force. Blackwell did not get into the specific training records of Lane and Kueng before testimony ended for the day.

Officers had responded to a 911 call that Floyd, 46, tried to use a counterfeit $20 bill at a corner store. The videotaped killing triggered worldwide protests and a reexamination of racism and policing.

Whether the officers deprived Floyd of medical aid is a key element of the case, and prosecutors have sought to show jurors that responding paramedics were not given important information, and that Floyd should have been given medical attention immediately.

An emergency room physician on duty at Hennepin County Medical Center when Floyd was brought in testified Thursday that it was too late to save Floyd.

Dr. Bradford Langenfeld said paramedics told him that although they had tried to resuscitate Floyd for about 30 minutes, he never regained a pulse. He said further attempts to restart Floyd’s heart at the hospital failed, and he declared Floyd dead after about a half-hour.

On Wednesday, paramedic Derek Smith testified that he wasn’t told Floyd wasn’t breathing and had no pulse when officers upgraded the urgency of an ambulance call. Smith agreed with prosecutor Manda Sertich that CPR should have been started as soon as possible — something the officers were trained to do.

Kueng, who is Black; Lane, who is white; and Thao, who is Hmong American, all are charged with willfully depriving Floyd of his constitutional rights while acting under color of law. One count against all three officers says they saw Floyd needed medical care and failed to help. A count against Thao and Kueng says they did not intervene to stop Chauvin. Both counts allege the officers’ actions resulted in Floyd’s death.

Prosecutors have argued that the “willful” standard can be met by showing “blatantly wrongful conduct” that deprived Floyd of his rights.

During opening statements, Kueng’s attorney, Tom Plunkett, said that Chauvin called “all of the shots” as the senior officer at the scene. Chauvin was convicted of murder and manslaughter in state court last year and also pleaded guilty in December to a federal civil rights charge.

Lane, Kueng and Thao also face a separate state trial in June on charges they aided and abetted murder and manslaughter.

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post Witness: 3 officers at Floyd killing had duty to intervene appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

At the first event of the day to mourn — well, fume — over the murder of George Floyd by Minneapolis police, activist Paula Minor climbed up on the back of a flatbed truck across from L.A. City Hall on Tuesday morning and shouted the obvious. “Changes were promised. A lot of things were said. A lot of things began,” she said, prompting nods from a few dozen protesters blocking 1st Street. “But here in Los Angeles, city and county, change did not occur.” She’s right.

Police are still killing Black and Latino people at disproportionate rates, as Californians were reminded last week by Floyd’s younger brother, Philonise, who flew to Southern California last week to stand with the family of yet another Black man killed by the cops. “The world needs to stand up for Anthony McClain just like they did for George Floyd,” Philonise told protesters assembled outside Pasadena City Hall. McClain, 32, was shot in the back last August while trying to flee a traffic stop.

The case has received fresh attention after the family’s attorney, Ben Crump — also an attorney for the Floyd family — recently released new video of his last moments. “We need to push the issue every day because, every day, it’s somebody being killed,” Philonise continued, shouting now in his thick Southern drawl: “It’s like a never-ending cycle!” At the first event of the day to mourn — well, fume — over the murder of George Floyd by Minneapolis police, activist Paula Minor climbed up on the back of a flatbed truck across from L.A. City Hall on Tuesday morning and shouted the obvious. “Changes were promised.

A lot of things were said. A lot of things began,” she said, prompting nods from a few dozen protesters blocking 1st Street. “But here in Los Angeles, city and county, change did not occur.” She’s right. Police are still killing Black and Latino people at disproportionate rates, as Californians were reminded last week by Floyd’s younger brother, Philonise, who flew to Southern California last week to stand with the family of yet another Black man killed by the cops. “The world needs to stand up for Anthony McClain just like they did for George Floyd,” Philonise told protesters assembled outside Pasadena City Hall. McClain, 32, was shot in the back last August while trying to flee a traffic stop.

The case has received fresh attention after the family’s attorney, Ben Crump — also an attorney for the Floyd family — recently released new video of his last moments. “We need to push the issue every day because, every day, it’s somebody being killed,” Philonise continued, shouting now in his thick Southern drawl: “It’s like a never-ending cycle!”

Copyright © 1881-2021. Los Angeles Times. Used with Permission.

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post Even supposedly liberal California hasn’t changed in the year since George Floyd appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — It’s common practice for police around the U.S. to place combative suspects face down and press down on their backs with hands, elbows or knees to gain control.

They aren’t supposed to do it for an “extended period” because that can lead to injuries or death. But what length of time is appropriate?

That question and the face-down method are in the spotlight after police video released last week showed officers in Northern California struggling with a man for more than five minutes as he lay face down.

He died. Two days after the video became public, a jury in Southern California awarded more than $2 million to the family of a homeless man who died in 2018 after officers in Anaheim used a similar technique to restrain him.

Now, a Los Angeles-area lawmaker who is a former police officer is trying to outlaw techniques that create a substantial risk of what’s known as “positional asphyxia” — legislation police oppose as either vague or unnecessary given that most departments already restrict the practice.

“This does not mean that a police officer can no longer restrain anyone when they need to for public safety, but it would mean that they cannot keep anyone from breathing/losing oxygen when restraining them,” Democratic Assemblyman Mike Gipson said in a statement.

He cited George Floyd’s death in Minneapolis last year, who was face down as an officer knelt on his neck for nearly nine minutes, and another California death before Christmas involving police in the San Francisco Bay Area community of Antioch.

The legislation is getting more attention after 26-year-old Mario Gonzalez died on April 19. Body camera video released last week showed he was pinned down by four Alameda Police Department employees. Officers confronted him after receiving 911 calls that he seemed disoriented or drunk and appeared to be breaking the security tags off bottles of alcohol he had in shopping baskets.

The department’s policy manual says a suspect “shall not be placed on his/her stomach for an extended period, as this could reduce the person’s ability to breathe.”

“Every department has policies on this,” said Ed Obayashi, a use-of-force consultant to law enforcement agencies and a deputy sheriff and legal adviser for the Plumas County, California, sheriff’s office. “Every law enforcement agency trains their officers, advises them, cautions them on this very restraint issue — positional asphyxia.”

Timothy T. Williams Jr., a police tactics expert who spent nearly 30 years with the Los Angeles Police Department, said the policy should be clearer.

“The policy needs to be more specific and directed: Once he or she is handcuffed, they are to be immediately removed from the prone position, put on their side and if possible set up,” Williams said. Otherwise, “you leave everything to subjective interpretation: What may be short to you may be long to me.”

That’s not new: A 1995 bulletin from the U.S. Department of Justice advised agencies that “as soon as the suspect is handcuffed, get him off his stomach.”

Williams and Obayashi agree that the officers in Alameda should have known that they needed to get Gonzalez onto his side more quickly. In fact, the video captures an officer suggesting they do so about 15 seconds before Gonzalez loses consciousness. Another officer refused, apparently fearing he would lose his grip.

The video shows one officer putting an elbow on Gonzalez’s neck and a knee on his shoulder, while another appears to put a knee on his back and leaves it there for about four minutes, even as Gonzalez gasps for air. Officers handcuffed him about two minutes after they pinned him to the ground but didn’t turn him on his back until three minutes later, when he had lost consciousness.

From a medical standpoint, any restriction of oxygen or blood flow is too long, said University of California, San Francisco, neurologist Nicole Rosendale.

“There are no kind of safe, defined ways to have someone in a position like this and reduce oxygen,” she said. “There’s no way to predict who might be at higher risk or lower risk of complications from this positioning.”

That’s the premise of the proposed California ban, which would outlaw applying pressure or body weight to a restrained person’s neck, torso or back or laying them face up or face down without proper monitoring.

The California State Sheriffs’ Association said the language is too broad, violations would be too difficult to judge and a ban would leave officers fewer options against violent suspects and more likely to use batons or stun guns.

The National Conference of State Legislatures said Nevada enacted a similar ban last year as part of broader legislation.

After Floyd’s death, California last year barred police from using arm-based grips, including chokeholds that apply pressure to a person’s windpipe and carotid holds that slow the flow of blood to the brain.

It was similarly once common to hog-tie, or hobble, combative suspects by binding their ankles to their wrists behind their backs, though the Los Angeles and New York police departments were among those that abandoned that practice nearly a quarter-century ago after it was blamed for too many deaths.

An attorney for the Alameda officers, Alison Berry Wilkinson, said they “used the lowest degree of force possible given the intensity of Mr. Gonzalez’s efforts to evade their grasp.” She said officers never pressed down hard enough to stop his breathing.

Eugene O’Donnell, a former New York City police officer and professor of police studies at New York’s John Jay College of Criminal Justice, said the body camera footage of Gonzalez’s arrest “is a training video for anybody who’s reasonably fair to see how hard it is if a situation becomes physical.”

“What you have now in many police departments is prohibitions that make physical arrests very hard — avoiding the chest, avoiding putting somebody on their stomach, avoiding their neck,” O’Donnell said. “And there’s always the possibility somebody can die in an arrest situation.”

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post Death draws attention to police putting suspects face down appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

Facebook is stepping up the enforcement of its rules ahead of the verdict in former Minneapolis Police Officer Derek Chauvin’s murder trial in George Floyd’s death.

The social media giant is tightening its content-moderation efforts, saying it wants to “protect peaceful protests and limit content that could lead to civil unrest or violence.”

The steps that Facebook is taking include identifying and removing calls to bring arms to areas in Minneapolis, which it has temporarily deemed to be a high-risk location. It says it is also removing material that “praises, celebrates or mocks George Floyd’s death.”

The company enacted similar measures to prevent the flow of misinformation and calls to violence in the aftermath of the 2020 presidential election as the world awaited results. While they worked to reduce misinformation, the measures were not permanent.

Facebook said Monday it will continue to remove posts that violate its community standards. These include hate speech, bullying and harassment and inciting violence. And it said it “may also limit” the spread of material that its systems predict may “likely” violate its rules.

The company did not say why it doesn’t make such emergency measures permanent, as many critics have called for. Facebook representatives did not immediately respond to a message seeking comment.

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle https://hsjchronicle.com/

The post Facebook prepares for Chauvin verdict by enforcing its rules appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

MINNEAPOLIS (AP) — Jury selection in the trial of a former Minneapolis officer accused in the death of George Floyd was put on hold Monday while an appeals court considers whether to reinstate a third-degree murder charge against him.

Derek Chauvin is already facing a second-degree unintentional murder charge and a manslaughter charge. He has pleaded not guilty.

Floyd, who was Black, died May 25 after Chauvin, who is white, pressed his knee on Floyd’s neck while he was handcuffed on the ground, pleading that he couldn’t breathe. Floyd’s death sparked months of mass protests nationwide over police brutality and race. In Minneapolis and some other areas, the civil unrest spiraled into violence. Other former officers who were present when Floyd died will face trial later this year.

Here’s a look at why the charge plays such a large role in the trial.

WHAT DO THE DIFFERENT DEGREES MEAN?

The degrees denote the seriousness of a crime. The more serious the crime, the higher the benchmarks that prosecutors must prove beyond a reasonable doubt to convict. First-degree murder is the most serious and results in life in prison if convicted. To convict, prosecutors must prove either that the act was pre-planned or that other major crimes were committed with it, among other things. Second-degree murder in Minnesota can be “intentional” or “unintentional,” which is the charge Chauvin faces, and is punishable by up to 40 years in prison if convicted.

Third-degree murder would require a lower standard of proof than second-degree. To win a conviction, prosecutors would have to show only that Floyd’s death was caused by an act that was obviusly dangerous, though not necessarily a felony. That would result in a maximum sentence of 25 years.

But there are caveats. Chauvin has no criminal history, which means he will probably end up serving about 12 1/2 years whether he is convicted of second or third-degree murder. Manslaughter, the least serious charge but also the one with the lowest burden of proof, means a maximum of just 10 years behind bars if convicted. For those seeking justice in Floyd’s death, anything less than murder is likely to feel like injustice.

WHY WAS THAT CHARGE DISMISSED TO BEGIN WITH?

Chauvin’s lawyer sought to dismiss the charge, arguing there was not probable cause to charge him with third-degree murder. A Minnesota judge ruled last October that third-degree murder under Minnesota law requires proof that someone’s conduct was “eminently dangerous to others,” plural, not just to Floyd. The judge said there was no evidence that Chauvin endangered anyone else and threw out the charge. Prosecutors appealed.

WHY PUSH TO HAVE IT ADDED AGAIN?

Very simply, reinstating the count could i ncrease the prosecution’s odds of getting a murder conviction in what will be one of the highest-profile police trials in the U.S.

CAN HE BE CONVICTED WITHOUT IT?

Yes. But it’s not going to be as easy as some might think. Even with the bystander video that showed Chauvin pressing his knee into George Floyd’s neck and ignoring the man’s pleas, legal experts say the case isn’t a slam dunk.

“It’s hard not to watch the video and conclude that the prosecutors will not have any trouble with this case,” said Susan Gaertner, the former head prosecutor in neighboring Ramsey County. “But it’s not that simple.”

The trial will come down to two key questions: Did Chauvin’s actions cause Floyd’s death, and were his actions reasonable?

The second-degree murder charge requires prosecutors to prove Chauvin caused Floyd’s death while committing or trying to commit a felony — in this case, third-degree assault. Prosecutors don’t have to prove that Chauvin was the sole cause of Floyd’s death — only that his conduct was a “substantial causal factor.” The manslaughter charge has a lower bar, requiring proof that Chauvin caused Floyd’s death through negligence that created an unreasonable risk, and consciously took the chance of causing severe injury or death.

Chauvin’s attorney, Eric Nelson, argues in court documents that Floyd likely died from fentanyl he consumed, or a combination of fentanyl, methamphetamine and underlying health conditions — not as a result of Chauvin’s knee on his neck.

WHAT HAPPENS NOW?

Prosecutors filed a request with the state’s Court of Appeals to put the trial on hold until the issue is resolved. They worry, in part, that they could lose the chance to try Chauvin later on the third-degree murder charge if the current trial goes forward while the appeal is ongoing.

The judge overseeing the case, Peter Cahill, sent potential jurors home for the day, while prosecutors tried to contact the appellate court. Cahill took a recess to give the Court of Appeals time to respond, but planned to bring attorneys back into the courtroom Monday afternoon to deal with other matters.

Cahill said he would proceed with the trial unless the higher courts told him to stop.

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post EXPLAINER: Why battle over a murder charge in Floyd’s death appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

MINNEAPOLIS (AP) — The former Minneapolis police officer charged with murder in the death of George Floyd posted bail Wednesday and was released from prison, leading Minnesota’s governor to activate the National Guard to help keep the peace in the event of protests.

According to court documents, Derek Chauvin posted a $1 million bond and was released from the state’s facility in Oak Park Heights, where he had been detained. Hennepin County jail records show he was released shortly before 11:30 a.m.

Floyd, a Black man in handcuffs, died May 25 after Chauvin, who is white, pressed his knee against Floyd’s neck for several minutes as Floyd said he couldn’t breathe. Floyd’s death was captured in widely seen bystander video that set off protests around the world. Chauvin and three other officers were fired. Chauvin is charged with second-degree murder, third-degree murder and manslaughter; Thomas Lane, J. Kueng and Tou Thao are charged with aiding and abetting both second-degree murder and manslaughter.

Upon news of Chauvin’s release, Gov. Tim Walz activated the National Guard to help local law enforcement. Walz said the Guard was mobilizing 100 soldiers and providing equipment and facilities “out of an abundance of caution” in light of public safety concerns. Walz said 100 state troopers and 75 Department of Natural Resources conservation officers were also mobilized to help local authorities.

Floyd family attorneys Ben Crump and Antonio Romanucci released a statement saying Chauvin’s release “is a painful reminder” that the family is far from getting justice.

“The system of due process worked for Chauvin and afforded him his freedom while he awaits trial. In contrast, George Floyd was denied due process, when his life was ended over a $20 bill. There was no charge, no arrest, no hearing, no bail. Just execution,” the attorneys wrote.

Floyd’s aunt, Angela Harrelson, told FOX-9 that she was still trying to process the news.

“It’s something that I’m not happy with. I’m not pleased with it. But I know I have to accept it because this is what the judge allowed to happen. … I know our family is not happy with this decision,” Harrelson said.

It was not immediately clear where Chauvin got the money to pay his bond. In Minnesota, someone who posts bond is required to pay 10%, in this case $100,000, to the bail bond company. Then, the company and the defendant work out an arrangement for collateral to back all or part of the rest of the bond amount, said Mike Brandt, a criminal defense attorney who is not connected to the case.

A message left with the company that posted the bond, Allegheny Casualty Company, was not immediately returned.

The Minnesota Police and Peace Officers Association, which has a legal defense fund, did not provide any money for bail, a spokeswoman said. Bob Kroll, president of the Minneapolis Police Officers Federation, said his union was not involved.

The website GiveSendGo.com, which says it is a free Christian crowdfunding site, has a Derek Chauvin Bail Fund that says it was created by his family. According to the site, as of midday Wednesday that fund raised $4,198 of its $125,000 goal, with donations from more than 35 people. A posting on the site dated Sept. 12 said it took time to set up a fundraising effort due to the high-profile nature of the case.

Chauvin had the option of posting bail for $1.25 million without conditions or $1 million with conditions. Under the conditions of his release, he must attend all court appearances, cannot have any direct or indirect contact — including social media contact — with any members of Floyd’s family, cannot work in law enforcement or security, and must not possess any firearms or ammunition.

Chauvin’s attorney had no comment Wednesday.

Chauvin’s wife, Kellie Chauvin, filed for divorce shortly after Floyd’s death. The records in that case have since been sealed and Kellie Chauvin’s divorce attorney didn’t immediately reply to a message seeking comment.

In July, the Chauvins were charged with multiple felony counts of tax evasion for allegedly failing to report income from various jobs, including more than $95,000 from Derek Chauvin’s off-duty security work. The criminal complaints in that case allege that from 2014 through 2019, the Chauvins underreported their joint income by $464,433 and owe the state $37,868 in unpaid taxes, interest and fees.

The tax evasion case also listed other assets, including the couple’s second home in Florida and a $100,000 BMW.

The Chauvin home in the St. Paul suburb of Oakdale was sold on Aug. 28 for $279,000, which was $26,000 less than the price it was listed at a month after Floyd’s death, according to online real estate records. It was not clear where Chauvin was staying after his release, but one of the conditions of his bail was that he not leave Minnesota without permission.

The other three officers charged in Floyd’s death had previously posted bond amounts of $750,000 and have been free pending trial. Currently, all four men are scheduled to face trial together in March, but the judge is weighing a request to have them tried separately.

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post Ex-officer charged in George Floyd’s death freed on $1M bond appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

Following weeks of national protests since the death of George Floyd, President Donald Trump signed an executive order Tuesday that he said would encourage better police practices. But he made no mention of the roiling national debate over racism spawned by police killings of black men and women.

Trump met privately with the families of several black Americans killed in interactions with police before his Rose Garden signing ceremony and said he grieved for the lives lost and families devastated. But then he quickly shifted his tone and devoted most of his public remarks to a need to respect and support “the brave men and women in blue who police our streets and keep us safe.”

He characterized the officers who have used excessive force as a “tiny” number of outliers among “trustworthy” police ranks.

“Reducing crime and raising standards are not opposite goals,” he said before signing the order, flanked by police officials.

Trump and Republicans in Congress have been rushing to respond to the mass demonstrations against police brutality and racial prejudice that have raged for weeks across the country in response to the deaths of Floyd and other black Americans. It’s a sudden shift that underscores how quickly the protests have changed the political conversation and pressured Washington to act.

But Trump, who has faced criticism for failing to acknowledge systemic racial bias and has advocated for rougher police treatment of suspects in the past, has continued to hold his ’law and order.” line. At the signing event, he railed against those who committed violence during the largely peaceful protests while hailing the vast majority of officers as selfless public servants.

Trump’s executive order would establish a database that tracks police officers with excessive use-of-force complaints in their records. Many officers who wind up involved in fatal incidents have long complaint histories, including Derek Chauvin, the white Minneapolis police officer who has been charged with murder in the death of Floyd. Those records are often not made public, making it difficult to know if an officer has such a history.

The order would also give police departments a financial incentive to adopt best practices and encourage co-responder programs, in which social workers join police when they respond to nonviolent calls involving mental health, addiction and homeless issues.

Trump said that, as part of the order, the use of chokeholds, which have become a symbol of police brutality, would be banned “except if an officer’s life is at risk.” Actually, the order instructs the Justice Department to push local police departments to be certified by a “reputable independent credentialing body” with use-of-force policies that prohibit the use of chokeholds, except when the use of deadly force is allowed by law. Chokeholds are already largely banned in police departments nationwide.

While Trump hailed his efforts as “historic,” Democrats and other critics said he didn’t go nearly far enough.

Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer said, “One modest inadequate executive order will not make up for his decades of inflammatory rhetoric and his recent policies designed to roll back the progress that we’ve made in previous years.”

Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said the order “falls sadly and seriously short of what is required to combat the epidemic of racial injustice and police brutality that is murdering hundreds of Black Americans.”

Kristina Roth at Amnesty International USA said the order “amounts to a Band-Aid for a bullet wound.”

But Trump said others want to go to far. He, framed his plan as an alternative to the “defund the police” movement to fully revamp departments that has emerged from the protests and which he slammed as “radical and dangerous.”

“Americans know the truth: Without police there is chaos. Without law there is anarchy and without safety there is catastrophe,” he said.

Trump’s audience included police officials and members of Congress, and came after he met privately at the White House with the families of men and women who have been killed in interactions with police.

White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany told reporters that many tears were shed at the meeting and “the president was devastated.” Trump listed the families’ relatives who died and said: “To all the hurting families, I want you to know that all Americans mourn by your side. Your loved ones will not have died in vain.”

White House adviser Ja’Ron Smith said it was “a mutual decision” for the families not to attend the public signing. “It really wasn’t about doing a photo opportunity,” he said. “We wanted the opportunity to really hear from the families and protect them. I mean I think it’s really unfortunate that some civil rights groups have even attacked them for coming.”

The White House action came as Democrats and Republicans in Congress have been rolling out their own packages of policing changes. Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina, the sole African American Republican in the Senate, has been crafting the GOP legislative package, which will include new restrictions on police chokeholds and greater use of police body cameras, among other provisions.

While the emerging GOP package isn’t as extensive as sweeping Democratic proposals, which are headed for a House vote next week, it includes perhaps the most far-reaching proposed changes ever from a party that often echoes Trump’s “law and order” rhetoric.

It remains unclear whether the parties will be able to find common ground. Though their proposals share many similar provisions — both would create a national database so officers cannot transfer from one department to another without public oversight of their records, for instance — differences remain.

The Republican bill does not go as far as the Democrats’ on the issue of eliminating qualified immunity, which would allow those injured by law enforcement personnel to sue for damages. The White House has said that is a step too far. As an alternative, Scott has suggested a “decertification” process for officers involved in misconduct.

During the Obama administration, Attorney General Eric Holder opened a series of civil rights investigations into local law enforcement practices that often ended with court-approved consent decrees that mandated reforms. Those included Ferguson, Missouri, after the killing of Michael Brown and Baltimore following the police custody death of Freddie Gray.

Hours before he resigned as Trump’s first attorney general in November 2018, Jeff Sessions signed a memo that sharply curtailed the use of consent decrees.

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

Search: order on police reform

The post Trump signs order on police reform, doesn’t mention racism appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

I don’t know how many of you were able to watch the recent Breakfast Club interview (New York City) with conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh. It was quite illuminating. There were some who felt the hosts were rude to Mr. Limbaugh (Rush Limbaugh Discusses George Floyd Protests + The State of America). I can assure you, as a pretty rabid conservative, they were not rude.

They were respectful and listened, for the most part, to his comments and questions. They respectfully disagreed with much of what he said. The fact that The Breakfast Club hosts agreed to such an interview was in itself an amazing feat on the part of Limbaugh (who requested the interview).

I would recommend you listen to some of The Breakfast Club’s podcasts and YouTube videos if for no other reason, to educate yourselves on their views (whether you agree or not). You have to listen with an open mind. The link of the video can be found here: www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Y1vGD7bNEg

There is a big disconnect between many blacks in America and whites about “white privilege”. Part of the problem is the definition of “white privilege”. I set about trying to get a rational definition of the term. On a website known as “Teaching Tolerance”, writer Cory Collins describes this term as follows: “White privilege is—perhaps most notably in this era of uncivil discourse—a concept that has fallen victim to its own connotations. The two-word term packs a double whammy that inspires pushback. 1) The word white creates discomfort among those who are not used to being defined or described by their race. And 2) the word privilege, especially for poor and rural white people, sounds like a word that doesn’t belong to them—like a word that suggests they have never struggled”. This may not be a collegial or professorial definition but more of a cultural view.

Collins goes on to quote Francis Kendall: “having greater access to power and resources than people of color [in the same situation] do.” Some of the problems that have arisen have to do with the fact that the term (white privilege) has changed over time.

Unfortunately, a lot of the changes that have taken place are unconscious and due in part to cultural differences. I’m not sure we’ll ever be able to unravel a standard definition of this term fully.

Collins closes with the following: “The more complicated truth: White privilege is both unconsciously enjoyed and consciously perpetuated. It is both on the surface and deeply embedded into American life. It is a weightless knapsack—and a weapon. It depends on who’s carrying it”.

Moving forward to another difficult to define the phrase, systemic racism. There are multiple definitions of systemic racism, also known as institutional racism. According to “Explainer” website, “Systemic racism,” or “institutional racism,” refers to how ideas of white superiority are captured in everyday thinking at a systems-level: taking in the big picture of how society operates, rather than looking at one-on-one interactions.” Google the term and you’ll be amazed at the multiple sites and videos available. By the way, the afore definitions apply to all countries, not just the United States.

Bottom line: we’re talking about invisible barriers to equality in all areas of life, decades of these invisible barriers. Bear in mind, I am a conservative and even I can see this.

What’s the cure? How would you solve this ongoing problem? Yes, it’s a problem. No one group will be satisfied with a proposed remedy. That doesn’t mean we can’t try.

In closing, across the seas, we observe Africa undergoing a transformation that will ultimately affect the entire civilized universe, including the USA and particularly Canada. In brief, the ANC (African National Congress) is making land grabs. They are perpetuating the takeover of white-owned farmlands, claiming the lands were stolen from their indigenous forefathers.

I won’t even attempt to discuss that one, but bear in mind that if they win that battle and whites are literally forced out of Africa (as some are), it will affect every civilized person living.

How do you solve that problem? How about having a great dinner in one of Hemet’s finest restaurants?

-Justin Collins – Hemet resident

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

Search:

The post The Politics of “Privilege” appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.