Duty of Care

A friend misunderstood when I asked them not to tell me bad things about Charlie Kirk.
They thought I was asking them to show respect and not to  speak ill of the dead. 

That's not what I meant at all. 
I meant that in terms of the crime at hand--public execution-–it doesn't matter who Kirk was any more than it mattered who George Floyd was. 
Even if they were the worst people ever, guilty of awful things,
they should not have been executed in cold blood.
(Or executed at all.)

And if they were the best people ever, the crime is the same.

A juror in the trial of Derek Chauvin for the murder of George Floyd said that she made up her mind of his guilt when she learned that police officers have a legal (not to mention moral) "duty of care"* for anyone in their custody.

Even if illegal drugs were involved in Floyd's death (THEY WERE NOT), he wouldn't have died if Chauvin had taken proper care of him.
Floyd did NOT die of drugs, but for the crime at hand, it simply doesn't matter if Floyd was an angel or an addict--or both.

"Custody" means protective care.

We are all in one another's custody. 

Discussing the virtue of a victim is a smokescreen for the real problem.

__________________

*duty of care (n.) a requirement that a person act toward others and the public with the watchfulness, attention, caution and prudence that a reasonable person in the circumstances would use.