As I type this the jury for the Derek Chauvin murder trial in Minneapolis, MN has entered the first full day of deliberations before reaching a verdict. While most of us have our thoughts on the former cop's guilt or innocence it now lies in the hands of 12 people. With that in mind a few thoughts are in order.
Let's start with the guilty or innocence issue. What we do know is that Chauvin's knee being of the neck of George Floyd for almost ten minutes is what led to the latter's death. While Chauvin's defense has claimed Floyd died of complications of previous medical issues in conjunction with that (hypertension, drug dependency issues, etc) medical experts called by the prosecution stated in their testimonies that those deaths would appear different during the autopsy than they did in Floyd's case (his autopsy ruled his death a homicide). When added to evidence that wasn't allowed in the trial (such as Chauvin's history of police misconduct complaints - over 15 in the course of his career) as well as testimony from bystanders that Chauvin's knee remained on Floyd's neck minutes after George Floyd was unconscious [a couple of reports have said the knee remained even after Floyd died) and it's clear that Chauvin's act was a large reason why George Floyd died that late Spring afternoon.l
So was it murder? Hard to say. Chauvin is charged with 2nd degree murder, 3rd degree murder, and manslaughter. Because of this we know that it wasn't premeditated. However, his actions would likely garner a guilty charge of murder if the defendant hadn't worked in law enforcement. This exact charge is up to the jury to decide so anything here may be speculation.
As for the trial itself, the fact the prosecution went for the jugular in a trial involving a police officer is a change from normal. Due to the difficulties of a police officer's job [both real and perceived] it's hard for an officer to be charged if an incidence of misconduct ends up killing someone. In some cases DA's overcharge and then don't do the best job prosecuting the case in the trial. This is also made difficult by the face that a prosecutor often has to work with police on their cases for the state, which requires them to walk a tightrope. In this case though several police officers, including the MPLS chief of police, testified that Chauvin violated policies on use of force. In addition, the prosecution on this case predicted a lot of what the defense might do and countered a lot of it early on. The defense did what they could with what they had but, when their best expert witness is being sued on the grounds he reportedly helped police in Maryland cover up a death, there are some stumbling blocks that - unless they're hoping for a mistrial or jury nullification - might not work well for them.
So should Derek Chauvin be convicted? Personally I say he should, even if only of manslaughter. While he may not have planned to kill George Floyd the fact that an off duty first responder told an officer at the scene that Floyd was losing consciousness and was ignored when she told them they needed to get the knee off of Floyd's neck shows that things that might (emphasis on might - we can't know for sure) have changed the outcome of this shows that the officer's actions are a main factor leading to Floyd's death. And all of this over the reported passing of a counterfeit $20.00 bill - something that nobody should be killed over.
However, as I stated earlier in this, while many of us outside the jury can believe Chauvin is guilty of at least manslaughter if not 3rd degree murder, it's up the the jury to decide. They have to put aside any of the media information they may have seen before the trial and focus on the evidence they were given. Is it possible that they'll find Derek Chauvin guilty? Yes. It can also end up in a not guilty verdict or a mistrial, depending on those 12 jurors and how they read the evidence.
And speaking of mistrials...Chauvin's attorney (Eric Nelson) yesterday in the closing arguments tried to use the statements of Rep. Maxine Waters (D, CA), who stated that Chauvin should be found guilty and that, if he isn't, people need to become vocal vocal and more confrontational, as something that would taint the jury, While the judge dismissed that he stated that they could use that in the mistrial., While that, and the reading of jury instructions when he did (before closing arguments when normally they're read after closing arguments wrap up) are odd it's hard to say whether the jury will take those into account. Also, as Cenk Uygur of the Young Turks pointed out, nobody asks for a mistrial if they think they're winning.
So will the jury bring a guilty or not guilty verdict for Derek Chauvin? Who knows. We do know that, regardless of the verdict it will be tense out in the streets. Here's hoping the tension doesn't become an explosive powder keg.
No comments:
Post a Comment