Central Park “Karen”

I heard on the news that EMTs stated he showed no signs of life when they arrived to the scene and that he was pronounced dead once he got to the hospital. I don’t know how true that is but I hope the information from the investigation comes out correctly.

This fits exactly with what my local chief of police (45 minutes from Minneapolis in Minnesota) says he is hearing/seeing. The EMTs who moved him from the street to the ambulance made NO efforts at CPR...just put him on the cot and moved him to the ambulance. He was dead on scene. The pronouncing him dead happened in the hospital. He died right there in the street. On camera. It is very very sad. (And, BTW, the local chief of police told me this was the most despicable thing he's ever seen in 29 years of law enforcement and it's keeping him awake at night. It was truly awful and heartbreaking. Good cops know it and are not spending one minute trying to defend it. He says they belong in prison.)
 
To compare this minor incident to the murder of Ahmaud Arbery and the death of George Floyd is really a total loss of perspective.

Some little princess running her mouth doesn't begin to compare with shooting Arbery 3 times with a shotgun. And to make that comparison, IMHO, trivializes Mr. Arbery's murder and weakens any argument about racism.

Go back and read my comment again. I did not equate the incidents as you have repeatedly insisted, but it is a spectacularly hyperbolic way of framing the narrative to direct the discussion as you wish.

I merely suggested it was a shame that we could not get George Floyd's thoughts on this Central Park incident. Why? I suspect he might be one among many who could break down precisely why the Central Park incident was much more threatening than a Facebook uproar or whatever trivial dismissal you care the (mis) characterize it with.

Why was the instigator so quick to invoke the prospect of involving the police? Because she understood quite well it represented a real threat. I doubt she expected there was any real possibility he would be killed or hurt by the police, or that the thought even crossed her mind. But she fully had the expectation (rightly or wrongly), that the police would defend her viewpoint AND that her adversary would definitely recognize the risks and back down. As I've outlined previously, the risks to employment and income disruption and the prospect of being saddled with some type of criminal record would absolutely loom as a very real possibility in Mr. Cooper's mind.

I don't think George Floyd would have needed this explained for him at all, not even a little bit.
 
Yes, he was pulseless when the EMT arrived, they tried resuscitation in the rig and it failed. So he was dead at the scene is what is being reported. I believe an EMT cannot declare a death so it is done at the hospital, a DOA.
Yes, it's the same here in FL -- paramedics can call it, EMT's can't. As a matter of protocol, when we have that situation, two paramedic officers (Lieutenant or higher) go through a quick checklist together and make the call.
The film showed that the man was handcuffed and subdued while on the ground but the officer continued to kneel on his neck for quite awhile. No weapons on either side were involved.
There is actually about a 6 minute building surveillance video that is much more damning than the video of the officer kneeling on Floyd's neck, IMHO.

It shows the entire sequence of the officers crossing the street from where they parked, getting all 3 people out of the vehicle, arresting Floyd (but not the other man and a woman in the car), and then eventually walking Floyd back across the street to place him in the police car. All of that happened very normally, without any resistance or even any questioning from the people in the car. It wasn't until they got to the police car that things went south, and this video doesn't show that very well.

The only point where I saw any difficulty was when they were first getting Floyd out of the driver's seat of the car. It took a moment, but it looked more like he might have been impaired and they were helping him out of the car. He wasn't resisting and the officers weren't using any force.

If asphixiation by the LE caused a heart attack it is still murder, not much different than a strangulation I would imagine.
Yes, of course. If ANY action by the officers that was not legally authorized caused any condition that led to Floyd's death, that would be murder.

I'm not sure the moron kneeling on Floyd's neck is the only culprit here. In one part of one video it looks like there is a second officer kneeling on Floyd's back. That would definitely cause difficulty breathing, and also with heart function. Another reason why the ME report is so critical.
 
Last edited:
Found that video. This is an edited version of the original 15+ video I saw, actually a little less than 6 minutes, but then repeats the last 90 seconds or so. There is nothing significant edited out -- just a bunch of standing around.

There is also an 18+ minute bodycam video at the bottom of this story, but it's all blacked out and useless.

In the surveillance video, Floyd looks intoxicated to me, but offers no resistance.

Toward the end of the video, as a lone officer helps Floyd up from sitting on the sidewalk (it's nearly impossible to stand up unassisted when you are handcuffed), he places a "come-along" hold on one of Floyd's hands. That is normal and proper procedure, especially since Floyd is much larger than the officer. Floyd protests a little, but another officer comes over, the hold is released, and the three of them cross the street to the police car without incident.

To me, this entire 6 minute sequence looks like a normal arrest...until they get to the police car. And from this video, I can't really tell what happened there.

Here's the video:

https://kstp.com/news/surveillance-video-shows-events-leading-up-to-george-floyds-arrest/5742404/
 
Last edited:


I am honestly appalled that we are on day, what, four, of just having this video of this man dying in the street at the hands of law enforcement just on a loop. I put on the TV at 6:45pm the other day and the channel that had been left on was airing the news and I was watching a man die right there on the TV at dinner time. The fact that anyone is like "let me see the video one more time," no, this is actual reality, not some scripted TV show. If nothing else makes you mad, and it absolutely should, at least be mad that we're so desensitized to murder now that there is barely a disclaimer on the television before it's aired.
 
I am honestly appalled that we are on day, what, four, of just having this video of this man dying in the street at the hands of law enforcement just on a loop. I put on the TV at 6:45pm the other day and the channel that had been left on was airing the news and I was watching a man die right there on the TV at dinner time. The fact that anyone is like "let me see the video one more time," no, this is actual reality, not some scripted TV show. If nothing else makes you mad, and it absolutely should, at least be mad that we're so desensitized to murder now that there is barely a disclaimer on the television before it's aired.
I refuse to watch it. We don't watch news on tv, so no danger of seeing it there and I can chose not to click on any of the hundreds of places it's been posted online.
 
From CNN: "The former Minneapolis police officer seen in a video with his knee on George Floyd's neck had 18 prior complaints filed against him with the Minneapolis Police Department's Internal Affairs, according to the police department"

I'm shocked. I mean, so very unbelievably...NOT shocked. Time to wait and see what kind of idiots line up to defend his actions. By idiots i am referring to his legal team and whatever talking head the police dept wants to throw in front of the media to make excuses or hollow apologies.
 


From CNN: "The former Minneapolis police officer seen in a video with his knee on George Floyd's neck had 18 prior complaints filed against him with the Minneapolis Police Department's Internal Affairs, according to the police department"

I'm shocked. I mean, so very unbelievably...NOT shocked. Time to wait and see what kind of idiots line up to defend his actions. By idiots i am referring to his legal team and whatever talking head the police dept wants to throw in front of the media to make excuses or hollow apologies.

I also read he was never reprimanded or punished for any of those complaints. No wonder he thought he could do as he pleased.
 
I also read he was never reprimanded or punished for any of those complaints. No wonder he thought he could do as he pleased.
He actually received discipline in 2 cases, but it's hard to know what to make of that without knowing Minneapolis PD's disciplinary process. The discipline he received in those two cases was "written reprimand," which is usually the lowest level of discipline, but again that really doesn't tell you anything either.

But past complaints don't have any bearing on his criminal culpability in this case.

Detailed information about the complaints really would tell us much more about the department's management than about the officer.

The part of the story that has me concerned right now is a statement made by the head prosecutor. The bolding is mine, and you can read the full story below.

Hennepin County Attorney Michael Freeman said he must look at all evidence.

"My job in the end is to prove he violated a criminal statute. And there is other evidence that does not support a criminal charge. We need to wade through all of that evidence and come to a meaningful decision and we are doing that to the best of our ability."


That's a pretty unsettling statement, because if the officer is NOT charged, all Hell is going to break loose. They're appealing for calm, but that's not a calming statement at all.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/28/us/minneapolis-george-floyd-thursday/index.html
 
Last edited:
Mike Freeman is an idiot. I have no confidence in him. At all.
It's tough to be a politician at a time which requires real leadership, and he's certainly not the only one who's done dumb things. Your mayor has done a whole series of dumb things -- not only dumb statements, but also dangerously poor decisions. And he has a lot of company across the political spectrum, from local to national.

Mr. Freeman is right, of course -- he does need to look at ALL of the evidence. The objective is the right final result, not a political Instagram moment announcing weak charges that later result in a Not Guilty verdict.

But he sure should NOT have made the comment about some of the evidence not supporting criminal charges. He knows there is always evidence on both sides, but that comment made it look like he was looking for an excuse not to charge anyone.
 
It's tough to be a politician at a time which requires real leadership, and he's certainly not the only one who's done dumb things. Your mayor has done a whole series of dumb things -- not only dumb statements, but also dangerously poor decisions. And he has a lot of company across the political spectrum, from local to national.

Mr. Freeman is right, of course -- he does need to look at ALL of the evidence. The objective is the right final result, not a political Instagram moment announcing weak charges that later result in a Not Guilty verdict.

But he sure should NOT have made the comment about some of the evidence not supporting criminal charges. He knows there is always evidence on both sides, but that comment made it look like he was looking for an excuse not to charge anyone.
That was a nice, thoughtful post. He should have added: An incident like this should never result in the loss of life. We will investigate this incident thoroughly, and we will also investigate what we have done systemically, on our part, to contribute to this tragedy even before the incident took place.

This isn't the time to mince words or qualify. An investigation will give further details.
 
I'm seeing men being called 'ok Karen' on twitter and facebook, too. I noticed it this morning. It's been going on for a while, but I never paid much attention to it. I noticed it because of this thread. :rotfl:

It isn't reserved only for women.
 
It’s always sickening to see echoes of horrifying things from the past in today's supposedly more enlightened world. Just as I am disgusted when I encounter casual anti-Semitism as I am well aware of how such attitudes eventually led to the Holocaust, people like Ms Cooper demonstrate all too clearly the mindset that led to atrocities like the Emmett Till lynching taking place.

I'm sorry but I have to correct you there. Hitler did not start the war because he hated Jews. He wanted to dominate the world, his hatred for those not his "ideal race" was just one of his many issues. My whole family is from Poland and everyone suffered from that psychopath. He didn't spare anyone unless he had use for them.
 
Update: Chauvin has apparently been charged with 3rd Degree Murder and Manslaughter.

Also FYI, the George Floyd case really doesn't have anything to do with "Central Park Karen," so I opened a new thread.
 
Last edited:
I'm sorry but I have to correct you there. Hitler did not start the war because he hated Jews.
There seems to be some confusion here, as I am not sure you are 'correcting' what was said by the PP. The PP did not say Hitler started the war because he hated Jews.

The Nazis did not did not plan on the Final Solution at first. That was at the Wansee Conference of January 1942. It came about because they were so successful. Germany was something like 4% Jewish, so rounding up Jews posed little logistical problem. But once they were rounding up most of the Jews of Europe, they were inundated. Auschwitz I was a former Polish army base and was not designed as a death camp, though certainly people were executed there. Later, they had to purpose-build Auschwitz II (Birkinau) as a POW/work camp, and they made it into a death camp in March of 1942 (two months after Wansee) in order to gas Jews immediately upon arrival. So anti-semitism absolutely did lead to the Holocaust. The PP is correct.

You are correct if you say it was not only Jews as their targets. The Nazis planned to enslave all Poles and build factories around Auschwitz where the Poles would perform slave labor.
 
The Nazis had no regard for Poles, Hungarians, Russians, all of the Eastern Europeans, those we call Gypsies, Jews of any country, Jehovah Witnesses, activist Lutherans, Communists, homosexuals, people of color(notwithstanding the alliance with the Japanese; just political expediency), and political adversaries of any country, and lots more. Basically, they only liked Germanic people which didn't stop them from trying to starve the Dutch to death.
 
Even Germans were vicitimized, yes, anyone who opposed the Nazis.

But we should not lump Nazi 'lack of regard' for Hungarians (as one example), with the rounding up of Jews. Hungarian Christians were not rounded up, and they were able to save some Jews through conversion. Germany had a lesser military presence in Hungary (as opposed to Poland and Slovakia), and approximately half of Budapest's Jews were saved. The only Slovak Jews that survived went to places like Budapest where there was some hope for survivial.
 
The Nazis had no regard for Poles, Hungarians, Russians, all of the Eastern Europeans, those we call Gypsies, Jews of any country, Jehovah Witnesses, activist Lutherans, Communists, homosexuals, people of color(notwithstanding the alliance with the Japanese; just political expediency), and political adversaries of any country, and lots more. Basically, they only liked Germanic people which didn't stop them from trying to starve the Dutch to death.

And the Germanic people that they liked had to be perfect. No abnormalities at all or else they would be gassed as well.
 

GET A DISNEY VACATION QUOTE

Dreams Unlimited Travel is committed to providing you with the very best vacation planning experience possible. Our Vacation Planners are experts and will share their honest advice to help you have a magical vacation.

Let us help you with your next Disney Vacation!





Top