Blacks put police at risk by aiding and abetting crime in their neighborhoods

By Carolyn Yeager

The second week of the Derek Chauvin trial has now wrapped up.

Monday through Thursday was devoted to testimony from the Minneapolis police chief, plus a selection of department investigators and training personnel discussing the MPD's “use of force” policies and what are approved tactics; then on to medical technicians and trainers, forensic doctors and scientists, and an emergency medical doctor. All agreed that George Floyd had been kept in a prone position (laying on stomach) while handcuffed and held down for too long, and this either contributed to or caused his death.

Defense Atty. Eric Nelson spent considerable time cross-examining most of these state witnesses and managed to get important concessions from some of them, especially on Tuesday and Wednesday. These were not good days for the prosecution; however, on Thursday they pulled out of their slump with some strong, confident expert medical testimony. Unfortunately Atty. Nelson was having difficulty with strained vocal chords and appeared in danger of “losing his voice.” He did seem better today; I'm sure he's doing everything he can to soothe and care for his throat so I guess he'll be alright.

Today, Friday April 9th, we heard extended testimony from a forensic pathologist, Dr. Thomas, followed by the Henepin Country Medical Examiner himself, Dr. Baker. While Ms. Thomas was clearly partial to the prosecution, Dr. Baker seemed less so and gave answers that could be seen by a novice like me as helpful to Chauvin's case.

Rather than further describe the straightforward science-based testimony we listened to this week, I want to return to last week's testimony from the 19-year-old Cup Foods employee who sold the cigarettes to George Floyd and accepted the fateful $20 counterfeit bill.

Christopher Martin (left) testified on Wednesday, March 31 that he accepted the bill from Floyd, recognizing at the time it was counterfeit. In doing so, didn't he aid and abet Floyd in his crime by allowing him to walk out of the store and return to his car in possession of the pack of cigarettes and change? The result of this was to bring the police into a situation that, if handled differently, would not have required police at all.

Why did Martin accept the bill? Why didn't he reject it, as another clerk had done that very morning when Floyd and Morries Hall were in the store trying to use a similar (or the same?) bill? Yes, this was their second try of the day in Cup Foods.

According to Martin's own testimony in court, recognizing that Floyd was 'high,' he wanted to 'help him out' or 'give him a break.' He admitted he felt sympathy or empathy for the tall black man … to the point that he thought he would cover the store's loss out of his own paycheck if the counterfeit was discovered. From a CNN account:

“Martin said he immediately believed the $20 that Floyd gave him in exchange for a pack of cigarettes was fake. But he accepted it, despite a store policy that said the amount would be taken out of his paycheck, because he didn't believe Floyd knew it was counterfeit and "I thought I'd be doing him a favor."

Would Martin have accepted a fraudulent bill from a white man? Seems very unlikely. And this is the case I want to make.

I want to point to a culture of tolerance for what I might term 'human weakness' within the black community. Low expectations lead to "covering" and the type of encouragement given to George Floyd by Christian Martin when the latter aided and abetted Floyd because, again, according to his testimony, Martin felt an affinity or partiality for him, and a desire to 'help him.' Thus he came up with the crackpot idea that he, Martin, would cover, from out of his own pay, if it was discovered that the bill was counterfeit. After all, not all counterfeit money is detected when used and could end up at the next place, or bank, it was passed along to.

Unfortunately for Derek Chauvin and his fellow officers, once the two hustlers were out of the store and Martin saw they remained in their parked car across the street, he changed his mind and reported the bill to the store manager. The manager (who looks to me to be middle-eastern and is said to wear a holstered gun on his belt at all times when at work) instructed Martin to go out to the car and request Floyd to come back into the store and make good on the fake bill. When the two men refused, after two requests, to return to the store with the cigarettes and change, the manager instructed another employee to call 911. He never involved himself personally in the affair at all. He has not testified in court either. Yet it was at his direction 911 was called.

In my opinion, now the police were involved in something they never should have been involved in, if members of the black community cared about crime in their community as a whole, rather than only what narrowly affects them personally. It's a very 'live and let live' attitude.

If Martin had done the RIGHT thing and not have accepted the counterfeit bill, he would have done Floyd and Morries Hall a real favor (as he realized himself later). This whole event would not have happened, at least not when and where it did happen. The two might even have decided that these bills were not usable and stopped trying to spend them. Instead, rookie patrolmen Thomas Lane and Alexander Kueng arrived at Cup Foods on a 911 call, and their new career, and lives, have been ruined.

Black communities are high consumers of police involvement, and low contributers to the cost of police upkeep. In other words, they get far more than they pay for. The rest of us pay for it. The police pay for it in heightened danger doing their jobs. To then try to solve racial tensions and outbursts of rioting by sending some policemen to prison due to trying circumstances, like in this case, or for not doing everything perfectly in hindsight, when they were clearly doing the best they could, only makes things worse in the long run.

Blacks “act up” frequently, they exhibit less impulse control than any other race. When black family members or business owners feel threatened by the actions of other blacks, they call on the police. They WANT the protection and problem-solving of the police, but then don't accept the use of deadly force that can sometimes result because of black unpredictability due in large measure to these lower levels of impulse control.

This has become a crisis for police, for all law enforcement agencies, and for society. We can't have different standards for different segments of society. Are we going to put our police officers under the impossible demand that they provide us with traditional white European standards for a peaceable society while at the same time satisfy the demands for greater leniency and 'tolerance' in African-American communities? This “Clash of Culture” is real and needs to be addressed honestly, without name-calling or fear of being “cancelled.” The question must be openly asked: When did diversity become a 'good' in and of itself, for its own sake, and is it a plus or a minus for stable societies?

This historic trial puts the question before us. Can we respond to it constructively, or only destructively? My wish is that when this case is turned over to the jury, the National Guards will be deployed in force in Minneapolis and in all our great cities, especially those with Democrat, left-wing governments, to ensure the peace. In addition, curfews should be enforced and demonstrations should be strictly limited in number of participants and length of time allowed to go on. This is fair and just because we all know that violence is being threatened [No justice, no peace]. As a nation, we should NEVER tolerate those who threaten violence if they don't get their way.

Next week should take us into interesting trial territory.