Seriously? They let him slowly kill a dude right next to him! This isn't a situation where he just whipped out a gun and instantly shot someone, that kind of thing would be hard to stop in time, they had literal minutes where they could've stepped in, and chose not to.
I've participated in law enforcement hand to hand and incapacitation training sessions (as a Marine). At least in those trainings, it was very clearly taught what techniques were safe and effective, how to use them, and we practiced them on each other literally hundreds of times. If you've ever had a blood choke or constrictive choke applied to you, you immediately understand what it's like, and what dangers it presents. The officer charged knew what he was doing, without a doubt. The officers around him had a moral and legal requirement to stop him to avoid being complicit in this murder; they chose to help in the murder instead.
In the military, I would have been convicted of a war crime had I done this to an unarmed and incapacitated enemy combatant; even in ignorance, even if it had been a mistake, even if I was tired and had a bad day. I'd hope our police force would be held to a higher standard dealing with our own citizens than a soldier or Marine dealing with an enemy of the state.
The question isn’t whether failing to stop a crime makes you an accessory, it’s a question of whether or not performing perimeter security for a crime makes you an accessory.
Because the parent poster's comment is dead, I'm responding to yours. Yes, obeying unlawful orders from your commanding officer is a violation of the UCMJ, and you will be criminally charged for doing so unless it can be demonstrated through strong evidence that you could not have known the order was unlawful. You are simply responsible for your own actions, as is everyone else (including the police).
If this is true and every office on the scene was that misinformed, it's still a systemic problem that requires a complete overhaul of the way police are trained and hired. This won't be fixed by punishing a few bad apples and then pretending the problem is solved.
What's the chances that of a sample of officers who responded, those 4 are the only ones who would have let this happen?
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?
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.
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.
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.
