To an athlete dying young analysis line by line - discuss impossible
While we've done our best to make the core functionality of this site accessible without javascript, it will work better with it enabled. Please consider turning it on! Remember Me. He continues to break records, take down seasoned players, and tears through the field, guns blazing. What can't this guy do? Twirling back around, Ochako hums, as she tilts the tea kettle, pouring hot water into two mugs on the kitchen counter. See the end of the chapter for more notes. to an athlete dying young analysis line by lineEyes To Eat | Dream Interpretation
Derek Chauvin placing all of his bodyweight on George Floyd's neck to pin him on the ground was not a use of deadly force, according to a defense expert who testified that a compliant person would have been 'resting comfortably' in Floyd's position. Use-of-force expert and former cop Barry Brodd offered that astonishing description when he was cross-examined by the prosecution at Chauvin's trial on Tuesday afternoon. During direct examination by defense attorney Eric Nelson, Brodd said Chauvin was 'justified' and acting 'with objective reasonableness' in his interactions with Floyd on May 25, He told the jury that police officers 'don't have to fight fair', athete that they can use a level of force that is 'one up' from the level of any resistance.
He ann that 'it's easy to sit and judge in an office' but altogether more difficult to 'put yourself in an officer's shoes' to really assess what was reasonable in that moment. Brodd said Chauvin's holding Floyd on the pavement, face down, for nine minutes and 29 seconds was 'not a use of force' but a 'control technique'.
Brodd's confident testimony took a turn when prosecutor Steve Schleicher stepped up to cross examine him, wasting no time in tackling the assertion that keeping Floyd in the prone position did not constitute a use of force and did not hurt. He asked Brodd if he truly believed that it is unlikely that 'orienting yourself on top of a person on the pavement with both legs [on top of them] is unlikely to produce pain?
The Book of the Law
As Brodd started to answer, speaking to the 'officer's intent', Schleicher shut him down. Showing the court the now all-too-familiar image of Chauvin kneeling on Floyd's neck, Schleicher said: 'Not the officer's intent sir. Regardless of the officer's intent, if this act could produce pain would you agree that this could be a use of force? Brodd was forced to concede: 'Shown in this picture, that could be use of force' - but argued that Floyd had grown increasingly non-compliant. Schleicher then showed a screengrab of Floyd pinned to the ground and asked: 'What part of this is not compliant? Refusing to deviate from his narrative Brodd insisted: 'I see his arm position. A compliant person would have both their hands in the small of their back and be resting comfortably.
LIBER AL VEL LEGIS
The disbelief clear in his voice, Schleicher asked: 'Did you say resting comfortably? Brodd said Chauvin was 'justified' and acting 'with objective reasonableness' in his interactions with Floyd on May 25, Before launching into his analysis Brodd noted that he's testified in 10 state and federal cases.
The most high profile case was that of Jason Van Dyke, a Chicago police officer who shot dead black year-old Laquan McDonald in In that case, Brodd told the court in that Van Dyke - who shot McDonald 16 times - was justified in his use of force because the teen was holding a knife. He acted out the incident by rushing at the defense attorney holding a plastic knife. Van Dyke was ultimately convicted of murder and sentenced to 6. Brodd's analysis of Chauvin's actions stood in stark contrast to testimony the jury heard last week when the prosecution called use-of-force expert LAPD Sergeant Jody Stiger, as well as a host of Minneapolis police officers, including the most senior officer in the department, Lieutenant Richard Zimmerman, and the Chief of Article source himself, Medaria Arradondo.
It’s Gonna Be a Longshot
Those witnesses had described Chauvin's use of force as excessive, unreasonable and a 'violation' of lins badge, police ethics and the 'highest principal' of policing — a respect of the sanctity of human life. The state rested on compelling testimony from Professor Seth Stoughton who said concluded that, 'No reasonable officers would have believed that was an appropriate acceptable or reasonable use of force. Brodd said he based his own assessment on three key factors.]
One thought on “To an athlete dying young analysis line by line”