When a white person dies at the hands of the police, the general presumption on the part of the public is that there wasn't intent on the part of the officer (s) involved unless there is sufficient evidence to demonstrate that there was. By assuming that Floyd was killed because his killer was racist, you are implicitly ascribing a motive, and therefore intent to the officer involved. So that has to lead you to thinking: why are we deviating from the regular framework of assessment? Isn't it arbitrary and nonsensical? Perhaps one of you can provide me with an explanation, but I doubt it.