The Trial of Derek Chauvin

[TexasHooch 5,122]

It seems like this should be a thread.

Stream it here:

 

Day 2: First juror seated for Derek Chauvin's murder trial
In the meantime, the wait is on for whether a third-degree murder count should be added in connection with the killing of George Floyd last May. 
By Paul Walsh Star Tribune MARCH 9, 2021 — 12:21PM
 

Spoiler

Jury selection began Tuesday in Derek Chauvin's murder trial, with one juror seated and three others dismissed while appellate issues in the case still loom.

Proceedings in Hennepin County District Court began about 8 a.m. with the sorting of more legal issues in connection with the trial of the fired police officer charged with pinning George Floyd by the neck to the pavement at a south Minneapolis street corner, killing him. Cahill reminded the attorneys early on that juror anonymity is a high priority for him, and that some questions from the lawyers about employment left enough clues to put revealing identity at risk.

The second potential juror to be brought into the courtroom was selected after being questioned at length by defense attorney Eric Nelson and for a few minutes by the prosecution. He revealed that he is a chemist who lives in Minneapolis and because of his profession, "I consider myself a pretty logical person. ... I rely on facts and logic and what's in front of me. Opinion and facts are important distinctions for me."

The newly chosen juror, who is white, said he has a generally favorable view of the Black Lives Matter cause but added that "I think all lives matter equally" and that the "Blue Lives Matter" message among police advocates is a counter viewpoint that isn't necessary.

After checking with the defense and prosecution, Cahill instructed the man was now a juror, should report back to court on March 29 and be prepared for proceedings to last about four weeks.

Much of Monday's court time was spent on Judge Peter Cahill hearing from attorneys about whether a third-degree murder count needs to be reinstated before the lawyers start screening potential jurors before a global television audience.

The waiting game was noted during the opening 30 minutes of Tuesday's proceedings, when Cahill asked whether anyone had heard yet from the Court of Appeals.

Upon seeing prosecutor Matthew Frank check his cellphone, the judge said, "You can all check your phones just to see where we are at." No one saw anything from the higher court.

So far, Chauvin stands charged solely with second-degree murder and manslaughter in the death of Floyd, a Black man whose death under the knee of a white officer sparked days of rioting in Minneapolis and St. Paul, along with protests around the country.

Numerous prospective jurors were brought in to the courtroom shortly after 9 a.m., and Cahill explained that additional charges could be added against Chauvin.

Attorneys on both sides introduced themselves. Defense attorney Eric Nelson rose and introduced himself. He did the same on behalf of his client, who stood quietly at his side.

Cahill went over the usual briefing for the prospective criminal trial jurors but also cautioned them not to read or watch any news coverage. He also informed them that the proceedings are on live television and that their voices will be heard but their faces not shown.

Nelson spent much of his time questioning the first potential juror, a married mother of three from Mexico, about the witness video that showed Chauvin pressing his knee against Floyd's neck for roughly 9 minutes, a visual that sparked riots and protests across the country.

The woman acknowledged that when she first saw that video she recalled Floyd saying "I can't breathe" and thinking at that moment "'He can't do that. Hey, don't do that or he's going to die. I feel that's not fair. We are humans.' "

Nelson asked the woman whether she could change her mind about that video upon hearing all the evidence during the trial, and she responded that she could. However, Nelson did point out that she answered on her questionnaire before reporting Tuesday that she wanted to be on the jury because "I would like to give my opinion of the unjust death of George Floyd."

Nearly an hour into the selection, Cahill told the first potential juror to be questioned that she was dismissed. Afterward, he told the attorneys that he received a text from a retired judge indicating he could see the potential juror's reflection in the plexiglass. He said the issue would be resolved over the lunch break.

Afterward, the second potential juror, a man who works as a chemist, was called to the courtroom. He said he believed he could be impartial and under questioning by Nelson, said he considers himself logical. Questioning continued Tuesday morning.

The third possible juror didn't last long, being excused by the judge after she said under oath that "I think could try to be impartial. I don't know that I could promise to be impartial."

She went on to explain that "there was a very clear action that was taken. No matter what kind of dress you put on the action, it happened. ... I think I definitely hope for a specific outcome, and I don't think that will change."

The defense struck the fourth would-be juror a Hispanic man who recently moved her from Southern California with experience practicing martial arts. Prosecutor Steve Schleicher challenged the strike, noting the man was the second of four questioned who is a person of color to be dismissed by Chauvin's side. Potential jurors cannot be dismissed on the basis of race.

Nelson pushed back and said the man's practice of martial arts worried him, as the juror said he believed Chauvin's knee pressed into Floyd's neck was not a sanctioned move. Cahill backed the dismissal but pointed to the prospective juror acknowledging that he does not come to the case with a presumption of innocence required of jurors.

Schleicher said that experience in martial arts could result in the dismissal of a disproportionate number of potential Hispanic jurors, who are more likely to practice Brazilian jujitsu.

"It's not that, and I didn't say that," Cahill said. "It's not specifically jujitsu training; what I hear him saying is that he has an opinion he is going to carry into the courtroom and you have to convince him otherwise."

Prosecutors called the Court of Appeals and filed a motion Monday asking them to postpone the trial but had not heard back by the end of the day. Ellison's office, which is running the prosecution, wants to reinstate the third-degree murder count against Chauvin based on a Feb. 1 Court of Appeals ruling in the unrelated murder case and conviction of former Minneapolis police officer Mohamed Noor.

The lead prosecutor, Assistant Attorney General Frank, argued that Chauvin's trial should be suspended since Nelson has asked the state Supreme Court to review how the Noor decision might apply to Chauvin's case.

Amid motions hashed out Tuesday morning was discussion of the scope of testimony allowed from Minneapolis firefighter Genevieve Hansen, who was caught on bystander video attempting to intervene while off-duty and repeatedly urging the officers to check Floyd's pulse and render aid.

"While she may be certified to perform CPR, she is not a pathologist, she is not a physician of any nature and whether or not she would have prevented Mr. Floyd's death had she intervened would be speculative," Nelson said.

Sundeep Iyer, one of the co-prosecutors on the case, said that Hansen would only testify to her observations that day.

"We're only offering her narrow belief that if she was able to intervene, if someone was able to intervene, to explain her observations," Iyer said.

The judge ruled that Hansen could testify to what she observed but could not speculate on whether Floyd could be saved.

Cahill also ruled there be no reference during the trial to Chauvin's firing the day after Floyd died. The judge said that anyone speaking in court must use "ended his employment" and not "terminated" in reference to when Chauvin became a former officer. Cahill said he didn't want the firing to suggest Chauvin's guilt to the jurors.

Also Tuesday, one of the prosecutors participating remotely for the first time was admonished by Cahill for referring to the defendant as "Chauvin." The judge interrupted him with a stern warning to address everyone by title, so it's "Mr. Chauvin."

Former officers J. Alexander Kueng, Thomas Lane and Tou Thao are scheduled to go on trial together on Aug. 23 on charges of aiding and abetting and murder and manslaughter in the death the 46-year-old Floyd, whose detention was captured on witness video seen around the world.

 

[TwiceHorn 31,434]

3 minutes ago, TexasHooch said:

Cahill went over the usual briefing for the prospective criminal trial jurors but also cautioned them not to read or watch any news coverage. He also informed them that the proceedings are on live television and that their voices will be heard but their faces not shown.

 

That's interesting.  I don't recall juror anonymity in other televised trials, but I'm not sure I was paying attention.

[Deej 76,750]

24 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

That's interesting.  I don't recall juror anonymity in other televised trials, but I'm not sure I was paying attention.

We never saw the OJ jurors. The camera was behind the jury box.

[DonkeyCigars 144]

I saw an interesting question: "The George Lloyd death was filmed and that clip was everywhere; how will one find an unbiased juror?" An interesting "2021 problem"

Edited March 9, 2021 by DonkeyCigars

[TexasHooch 5,122]

2 minutes ago, DonkeyCigars said:

I saw an interesting question: "The George Lloyd death was filmed and that clip was everywhere; how will one find an unbiased juror?" An interesting "2021 problem"

They don't even have the expectation of finding 12 people who haven't' seen it. 

From the article above:

Quote

The woman acknowledged that when she first saw that video she recalled Floyd saying "I can't breathe" and thinking at that moment "'He can't do that. Hey, don't do that or he's going to die. I feel that's not fair. We are humans.' "

Nelson asked the woman whether she could change her mind about that video upon hearing all the evidence during the trial, and she responded that she could. However, Nelson did point out that she answered on her questionnaire before reporting Tuesday that she wanted to be on the jury because "I would like to give my opinion of the unjust death of George Floyd."

 

[DonkeyCigars 144]

1 minute ago, TexasHooch said:

They don't even have the expectation of finding 12 people who haven't' seen it. 

From the article above:

 

I saw the first juror's profile in an article, and seems like the best you can hope for, if you are the defense attorney:

Quote

 

The first juror chosen is a white man who appears to be about 30 years old. A chemist who works in a lab analyzing environmental samples, he described himself as a “pretty logical person” who relies on facts and “what’s in front of me.” He said he worked as a summer camp counselor through his childhood synagogue, helping to resolve disputes among campers.

The juror, who plays Ultimate Frisbee and goes backpacking several times a year, said he hasn’t seen the video of Floyd’s arrest. He said he visited George Floyd Square – where Floyd was pinned under Chauvin’s knee – with his fiancé because “it was a transformative event for that area” and they were thinking of moving there.

During questioning, the man provided more neutral opinions than what he put on a questionnaire sent in advance. For example, he responded on the questionnaire he “somewhat agreed” that officers might cover up crimes involving use of force. Under questioning, he said he had no opinion. He moderated his opinions on the "black lives matter" and "blue lives matter" movements, too.

"I support the message that every life should matter equally," he said Tuesday. "I think all lives matter equally."

 

 

[Foosters 17,820]

I always find it a bit humorous when the palatable jurors for each side get reversed. Typically, prosecutors are trying to stack the box with white folks and kick folks of color. Depending on the case, they may want more women or men, but its always white folks. Defense attorneys are usually trying to kick white folks and keep young people of color. Of course, both sides do it in a way that it appears, at least in the record, as race neutral. Typically, that above 30 year old white chemist is the perfect juror for the prosecution. Now, not so much.

 

[StruggleBus 3,922]

I'm sure this thread will go about as well as this trial. 

[Brisketexan 105,041]

1 minute ago, StruggleBus said:

I'm sure this thread will go about as well as this trial. 

Yep.

All shows are shitshows in 2020-2021 America.

[TwiceHorn 31,434]

2 minutes ago, Foosters said:

I always find it a bit humorous when the palatable jurors for each side get reversed. Typically, prosecutors are trying to stack the box with white folks and kick folks of color. Depending on the case, they may want more women or men, but its always white folks. Defense attorneys are usually trying to kick white folks and keep young people of color. Of course, both sides do it in a way that it appears, at least in the record, as race neutral. Typically, that above 30 year old white chemist is the perfect juror for the prosecution. Now, not so much.

 

Of course, if they were inclined to throw it in favor of law enforcement, they could just stick to their ordinary practice.  That's what kind of worries me about these things.

[AUS-97HORN 11,756]

I read an article yesterday that said they delayed the trial by a day to see if they could get 3rd degree murder charges listed as an alternative to 2nd degree.   They would still go for 2nd degree murder, but some pundits felt that if the 3rd degree option was on the table the jurors might consider that instead.

 

its all bullshit and it makes me really worried this guy is going to somehow end up not being convicted of murder... and the holy shit-dom that would come from that is terrifying.

[TwiceHorn 31,434]

24 minutes ago, DonkeyCigars said:

I saw the first juror's profile in an article, and seems like the best you can hope for, if you are the defense attorney:

 

The video is basically a fact, that may lack context, so it's less problematic than having reached an irreversible conclusion or bias as to what happened, based on the video or something else entirely.  As long as a juror can say they remain open-minded as to what the video shows, or the context of what it shows, that's legally not biased.

[Samson's Wig 3,189]

3 minutes ago, AUS-97HORN said:

I read an article yesterday that said they delayed the trial by a day to see if they could get 3rd degree murder charges listed as an alternative to 2nd degree.   They would still go for 2nd degree murder, but some pundits felt that if the 3rd degree option was on the table the jurors might consider that instead.

 

its all bullshit and it makes me really worried this guy is going to somehow end up not being convicted of murder... and the holy shit-dom that would come from that is terrifying.

Better start hoarding supplies now.

[TwiceHorn 31,434]

6 minutes ago, AUS-97HORN said:

I read an article yesterday that said they delayed the trial by a day to see if they could get 3rd degree murder charges listed as an alternative to 2nd degree.   They would still go for 2nd degree murder, but some pundits felt that if the 3rd degree option was on the table the jurors might consider that instead.

 

its all bullshit and it makes me really worried this guy is going to somehow end up not being convicted of murder... and the holy shit-dom that would come from that is terrifying.

There's always a dilemma there.  Having a lesser charge may reduce the likelihood of an acquittal, but also raises the likelihood of conviction of the lesser charge.

In Texas, there's a tendency to "game" it by leaving it out of the indictment but adding it by trial amendment if it seems the evidence is such that one of the likelihoods above comes into play.

In this particular case, I think it was charged in the indictment, but the judge threw it out.  They were waiting for the Court of Appeals to rule if that was proper or improper, and it ruled that it should have been left in.

Edited March 9, 2021 by TwiceHorn

[Johnny Sack 8,397]

8 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

There's always a dilemma there.  Having a lesser charge may reduce the likelihood of an acquittal, but also raises the likelihood of conviction of the lesser charge.

In Texas, there's a tendency to "game" it by leaving it out of the indictment but adding it by trial amendment if it seems the evidence is such that one of the likelihoods above comes into play.

In this particular case, I think it was charged in the indictment, but the judge threw it out.  They were waiting for the Court of Appeals to rule if that was proper or improper, and it ruled that it should have been left in.

I have not looked at the elements, in your opinion does this crime fit second degree murder?  Or is it third degree?

[TexasHooch 5,122]

In this case the 3rd Degree Murder charge was originally there but thrown out by this trial judge.  They appealed it and won, so it's back in front of the same judge.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/appeals-court-reinstates-third-degree-murder-charge-against-ex-officer-n1259725

Quote

The trial judge, Peter Cahill, of the Fourth Judicial District Court, which serves Hennepin County, dismissed a third-degree murder count in October for lack of probable cause. Cahill ruled at the time that a third-degree murder charge under Minnesota law requires proof that someone's conduct was "eminently dangerous to others," not just to Floyd.

But prosecutors had asked the Minnesota Court of Appeals to reinstate the charge in light of its decision last month to uphold a third-degree murder conviction against former Minneapolis police Officer Mohamed Noor for the 2017 fatal shooting of Justine Ruszczyk Damond, an Australian woman who had called 911 to report hearing a possible sexual assault happening. The Court of Appeals ruled in Noor's case that "third-degree murder may occur even if the death-causing act endangered only one person," according to the prosecutors' motion filed last month.

A three-judge panel said Cahill should have followed the precedent set by the appeals court last month when it affirmed Noor's third-degree murder conviction.

 

[TwiceHorn 31,434]

8 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

I have not looked at the elements, in your opinion does this crime fit second degree murder?  Or is it third degree?

Dunno.

He was charged with 2nd Degree Murder, https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.19

2nd Degree Manslaughter, https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.205

and 3rd Degree Murder, https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.195

The Court of Appeals opinion is here, so you get the local flava.  https://www.mncourts.gov/mncourtsgov/media/High-Profile-Cases/27-CR-20-12646/Opinion03052021.pdf

 

Also, maybe a handy link to all kinds of official documents in the Chauvin case. https://www.mncourts.gov/media/StateofMinnesotavDerekChauvin

Edited March 9, 2021 by TwiceHorn

[Parliament 14,227]

17 replies in and no politics. I'm impressed. Even the resident lawyers haven't started peacocking.

[dcar00 14,144]

Its all going to come down to whether the jurors consider what Chauvin did was the same as what the police manual describes as a legal maneuver.  if no, he goes down, if yes, he walks.  the time element is the big wild card.

I can see a jury saying we have to give him something based on the amount of time and giving him 2nd degree manslaughter, if that is an option.  I haven't looked close enough to understand if it is.

 

 

[South Austin 52,431]

13 minutes ago, Parliament said:

17 replies in and no politics. I'm impressed. Even the resident lawyers haven't started peacocking.

Ted Cruz is a piece of shit.

[MissingInAction 25,002]

If this murdering POS gets acquitted, the LA 92 riots are gonna seem like a trip to Disneyland. Every major city in this country will burn.

[Brisketexan 105,041]

1 minute ago, MissingInAction said:

If this murdering POS gets acquitted, the LA 92 riots are gonna seem like a trip to Disneyland. Every major city in this country will burn.

I'd go ahead and stock up on fire extinguishers if I were you.  I think our inherent social bias is still strongly pro-police, giving them every benefit of the doubt, which makes a defense verdict much more likely.  Doesn't mean a conviction is impossible, but I think it's pretty plain that a police officer defendant has a much, much higher chance of acquittal than a "civilian" who committed the same acts would have.

[Armybrat 40,815]

19 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

Its all going to come down to whether the jurors consider what Chauvin did was the same as what the police manual describes as a legal maneuver.  if no, he goes down, if yes, he walks.  the time element is the big wild card.

I can see a jury saying we have to give him something based on the amount of time and giving him 2nd degree manslaughter, if that is an option.  I haven't looked close enough to understand if it is.

 

 

I’d say 2nd degree manslaughter would be a possibility IF he had not been kneeling on Floyd with that smirk on his face.
But he did, so fuck him.

[TwiceHorn 31,434]

10 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I'd go ahead and stock up on fire extinguishers if I were you.  I think our inherent social bias is still strongly pro-police, giving them every benefit of the doubt, which makes a defense verdict much more likely.  Doesn't mean a conviction is impossible, but I think it's pretty plain that a police officer defendant has a much, much higher chance of acquittal than a "civilian" who committed the same acts would have.

Well, it's kind of interesting that Hennepin County convicted the last cop murderer and that decision is bearing on this one.  However, he was a brown cop that kilt a perfectly good white woman, so maybe all bets are off.

[dcar00 14,144]

3 minutes ago, Armybrat said:

I’d say 2nd degree manslaughter would be a possibility IF he had not been kneeling on Floyd with that smirk on his face.
But he did, so fuck him.

sure fuck him but IMO they are going to have trouble with murder based on the manual and his resisting.  I'm not saying he shouldn't go down for murder.  I'm 99% sure they'd get 2nd degree manslaughter.  of course I am one of the 1% on here who are not Surly Law Grads.

[TexasHooch 5,122]

3 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, it's kind of interesting that Hennepin County convicted the last cop murderer and that decision is bearing on this one.  However, he was a brown cop that kilt a perfectly good white woman, so maybe all bets are off.

Yep. That case did nothing to ease the tensions around here about police overreach for exactly the reason you cite.  The fact that it was a black cop who killed a white woman only ensured that no one was really going to feel justice or vindication, regardless of the verdict. That was a fact that was accepted from the beginning.

This case has none of the gray area that the Noor case did.  There are no competing narratives in the eyes of those who (correctly in my opinion) see this as murder.  There will be justice or there won't.  I think people will accept any verdict that includes "murder" in the title, but manslaughter isn't going to cut it, even though I personally believe that's the most likely result.

 

[Al_4_ISU 12,447]

44 minutes ago, MissingInAction said:

If this murdering POS gets acquitted, the LA 92 riots are gonna seem like a trip to Disneyland. Every major city in this country will burn.

He's going to walk.  He's a cop.  I'm not sure it's possible for police to get convicted in this country anymore.  This is the same jurisdiction where Philando Castile was murdered.

I'm guessing that Minneapolis is going to have enough police/military presence to keep things in check when that happens, but I would imagine it will get bad other places that aren't as ready for it.

Edited March 9, 2021 by Al_4_ISU

[Al_4_ISU 12,447]

41 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I'd go ahead and stock up on fire extinguishers if I were you.  I think our inherent social bias is still strongly pro-police, giving them every benefit of the doubt, which makes a defense verdict much more likely.  Doesn't mean a conviction is impossible, but I think it's pretty plain that a police officer defendant has a much, much higher chance of acquittal than a "civilian" who committed the same acts would have.

Yup.  If these were two guys in a bar, Chauvin would be convicted easily.

[TexasHooch 5,122]

Quote

This is the same jurisdiction where Philando Castile was murdered.

It doesn't invalidate your greater point, but no it's not. This is Hennepin County, that was Ramsey.

[Al_4_ISU 12,447]

2 minutes ago, TexasHooch said:

It doesn't invalidate your greater point, but no it's not. This is Hennepin County, that was Ramsey.

I meant Minnesota.  I assume this is a state level charge, right (and not federal)?  The jury pools in Hennepin and Ramsey Counties would be really similar demographically, no?

Edited March 9, 2021 by Al_4_ISU

[Johnny Sack 8,397]

I think only way he walks is if they create reasonable doubt on causation.

I don't think he will walk. 

[TexasHooch 5,122]

Quote

I meant Minnesota.  I assume this is a state level charge, right?

Different Judicial Districts (4th vs 2nd).  Though you've reminded me that the state AG's office is prosecuting this one, and not the county.  Ramsey County prosecuted the other one.

Yes.  The jury pools are very similar.  (Texans, think Dallas County vs Tarrant County).

Edited March 9, 2021 by TexasHooch

[Homercles 10,205]

38 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

sure fuck him but IMO they are going to have trouble with murder based on the manual and his resisting.  I'm not saying he shouldn't go down for murder.  I'm 99% sure they'd get 2nd degree manslaughter.  of course I am one of the 1% on here who are not Surly Law Grads.

I’m a grad of Surly Law...Hebius Coitus, Bitches

[GopherRock 1,765]

Here's an account of how the jury deliberation went during the trial of Philando Castile

https://www.mprnews.org/story/2017/06/23/74-seconds-yanez-juror

Quote

On who the jury was

The jury comprised "down the middle, working people," the juror said.

"I don't want to call us average, but that's exactly what we were," he said.

When they realized the gravity of the case, the juror said, those selected to sit on the jury seemed to hope they were alternates. At least one volunteered for the role.

Everyone was respectful to one another regardless of their thoughts on the case, the juror said.

In the middle of the week, he said, the jury was "hopelessly deadlocked." But one of the jurors had a birthday.

"We brought in a crown from Burger King and somebody gave her some M&Ms and somebody brought her some tea they picked up in Scotland and we sang happy birthday to her at the end of the day."

How the jury went from deadlock to unanimous verdict

Jurors were quick to decide Yanez's acquittal on felony weapons charges. The juror said photos of Castile's body showed that Yanez was aiming away from the two passengers, Diamond Reynolds and her 4-year-old daughter.

Jurors couldn't agree on the manslaughter charge for days, though.

"What we were looking at was some pretty obscure things to a lot of people, like culpable negligence. You think you might know what it means: It's negligent, but maybe pretty bad negligence. Well, it's gross negligence with an element of recklessness ... We had the law in front of us so we could break it down."

"It just came down to us not being able to see what was going on in the car. Some of us were saying that there was some recklessness there, but that didn't stick because we didn't know what escalated the situation: was he really seeing a gun? We felt [Yanez] was an honest guy ... and in the end, we had to go on his word, and that's what it came down to."

On his takeaways of the past week

"Overall, I think if anybody's handling this the right way, it would be Philando's mom. I think if you want to make a change, you can't go after jury or a police officer. I think you need to go after the law. I don't know what that means. I've been thinking about it this week. I don't know how you go about doing that. Do you run for city council?

"I feel like Obama said it best when he was leaving office: Just get involved. I don't know if that means contacting your representative or your congressman or picking up a book and going to law school. I don't know you do it, but I think people should figure out a way to make a difference. They should get involved.

"Go after the law. Don't go after people. There are some situations where people are clearly guilty and then yes. But in situations like this, it's the law. It's the law that people need to go after."

 

[GopherRock 1,765]

They seated 3 today, and will be adjourning for the day shortly. A chemist, an auditor, and a woman who seemed way too excited to be on a jury.

As someone who has never been part of voir dire on either side, this is both fascinating and boring.

[dcar00 14,144]

23 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

I think only way he walks is if they create reasonable doubt on causation.

I don't think he will walk. 

thats why the information on the move in the manual(along with the drugs in his system) will be the key.  how many times has that particular maneuver been used and no one died?  why was the maneuver allowed in the manual in the first place? was their some data/testing that showed a knee to the side of the neck to restrain is not deadly?

do they actually teach that move in training? 

If they say that he held the knee longer than necessary, or the manual allows, to restrain then I can see getting a conviction for sure but is it murder by the book?  they should have gone for manslaughter and given him the max.

[J.R. Juniors Junior Jr. 1,084]

4 hours ago, TexasHooch said:

It seems like this should be a thread.

Stream it here:

 

Day 2: First juror seated for Derek Chauvin's murder trial
In the meantime, the wait is on for whether a third-degree murder count should be added in connection with the killing of George Floyd last May. 
By Paul Walsh Star Tribune MARCH 9, 2021 — 12:21PM
 

 

He looks like a really crappy punk rock musician in that picture.

[TexasHooch 5,122]

4 minutes ago, J.R. Juniors Junior Jr. said:

He looks like a really crappy punk rock musician in that picture.

[J.R. Juniors Junior Jr. 1,084]

2 minutes ago, TexasHooch said:

No, that's a great punk rock musician

[Guest Lobo]

Yeah, if he walks on this...the moral relativism that erupts afterwards would break the country.  You'd have people protesting in every major city in this country, and you've have Proud Boys/Qanon/Oathkeepers opening fire on them in order to "Keep the Peace."  

There's a real good chance he gets a sympathetic jury who'll still buy into the "Can't make it home at night to your family unless you choke a dude out on the way."  

If we're all honest...which we're not gonna be.  True justice is a "nice to have" at this point.  The downsides are so vast and disturbing, it would fill pages on this thread.  but if we're really honest, even some police would agree...in the national interest of the country...for so many reasons I can think of, but mostly for reasons I can't think of right now...it's best for everyone if Derek Chauvin is murdered in transit, or takes his own life before the trial ends.  Tell him his kids will receive free, top-notch counseling and their college will be taken care of, but he's gotta end this before it goes to far.  The risk of his acquittal is too great, and the risk of what pissed off fellow "blue liners" might do if he's convicted is too risky.  Nevermind what folks on both sides of this issue will take the streets to do if the verdict doesn't go their way.  It's in the interest of National Security if Chauvin is given something to help him fall asleep one night. 

[Johnny Sack 8,397]

2 minutes ago, Lobo said:

Yeah, if he walks on this...the moral relativism that erupts afterwards would break the country.  You'd have people protesting in every major city in this country, and you've have Proud Boys/Qanon/Oathkeepers opening fire on them in order to "Keep the Peace."  

There's a real good chance he gets a sympathetic jury who'll still buy into the "Can't make it home at night to your family unless you choke a dude out on the way."  

If we're all honest...which we're not gonna be.  True justice is a "nice to have" at this point.  The downsides are so vast and disturbing, it would fill pages on this thread.  but if we're really honest, even some police would agree...in the national interest of the country...for so many reasons I can think of, but mostly for reasons I can't think of right now...it's best for everyone if Derek Chauvin is murdered in transit, or takes his own life before the trial ends.  Tell him his kids will receive free, top-notch counseling and their college will be taken care of, but he's gotta end this before it goes to far.  The risk of his acquittal is too great, and the risk of what pissed off fellow "blue liners" might do if he's convicted is too risky.  Nevermind what folks on both sides of this issue will take the streets to do if the verdict doesn't go their way.  It's in the interest of National Security if Chauvin is given something to help him fall asleep one night. 

I don't think there will be much of an outrage on the streets if he is convicted.

[Guest Lobo]

Not "mobs" per se...but there'll be plenty of angry police making several questionable traffic stops for several weeks afterwards.  Again, that's the least of my worries.  What can and will go south if he's acquitted is the real risk to the country.  It would just be safer for the country if he were to have himself, an accident. 

[Celery Man 20,929]

1 hour ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Yup.  If these were two guys in a bar, Chauvin would be convicted easily.

facts.

[fattyflattie 4,639]

No way he walks. This will be Epstein territory. They aren’t going to let the country burn right now. Fuck him in his murdering ass. 

[TexasHooch 5,122]

26 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

thats why the information on the move in the manual(along with the drugs in his system) will be the key.  how many times has that particular maneuver been used and no one died?  why was the maneuver allowed in the manual in the first place? was their some data/testing that showed a knee to the side of the neck to restrain is not deadly?

do they actually teach that move in training? 

If they say that he held the knee longer than necessary, or the manual allows, to restrain then I can see getting a conviction for sure but is it murder by the book?  they should have gone for manslaughter and given him the max.

Fuck no it's not in the "manual".  He was trained to stay off the neck and (most importantly) move the subject to a recovery (side or sitting) position as soon as he is secured in cuffs  That's why the rookie cop he was with suggested it, because it had just been drilled into his brain in academy.  Sadly he didn't have the balls to force the issue, but his time will come.

[staboner 4,969]

2 hours ago, StruggleBus said:

I'm sure this thread will go about as well as this trial. 

listen, if you play the video backwards he helps Floyd up off the ground and helps him on his way

[dcar00 14,144]

9 minutes ago, TexasHooch said:

Fuck no it's not in the "manual".  He was trained to stay off the neck and (most importantly) move the subject to a recovery (side or sitting) position as soon as he is secured in cuffs  That's why the rookie cop he was with suggested it, because it had just been drilled into his brain in academy.  Sadly he didn't have the balls to force the issue, but his time will come.

its not?  I thought it was(the initial maneuver to restrain).  I think they had him handcuffed and sitting at one point then tried to put him in the car and he resisted again.  It does seem they could have put him on his side next to the car.  I'm for just letting whoever it is run around as soon as they are handcuffed if they won't get in the car.  then call the paddy wagon and let someone else deal with it.

Edit: if the move isn't in the manual as a way to restrain then it doesn't matter.   I agree he's likely going down no matter what.

Edited March 9, 2021 by dcar00

[TwiceHorn 31,434]

47 minutes ago, GopherRock said:

They seated 3 today, and will be adjourning for the day shortly. A chemist, an auditor, and a woman who seemed way too excited to be on a jury.

As someone who has never been part of voir dire on either side, this is both fascinating and boring.

It appears that they are questioning one potential juror at a time?  Outside the presence of the other potential jurors?  Is that right?

Is that a MN thing TexasHooch?  I can't recall seeing such a thing.  Maybe in a death penalty case?  I can't recall.

Edited March 9, 2021 by TwiceHorn

[GringoSalado 1,651]

2 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Well, it's kind of interesting that Hennepin County convicted the last cop murderer and that decision is bearing on this one.  However, he was a brown cop that kilt a perfectly good white woman, so maybe all bets are off.

Believe the SC case is about his 3rd degree murder conviction, no? The part about "eminently dangerous to others" when Noor's dumbassery was only eminenly dangerous to the white woman he was panic shooting.

 

https://www.kare11.com/article/news/crime/noor-legal-team-appeals-third-degree-murder-charge-to-minnesota-supreme-court/89-567efb3b-13e9-46ae-a63f-ad037fd777d7#:~:text=Noor was convicted of second,death of Justine Ruszczyk Damond.&text=MINNEAPOLIS — The Minnesota Supreme Court,former Minneapolis officer Mohamed Noor.

 

Quote

Noor's legal team disagrees with the Minnesota Court of Appeals' decision that "a conviction for third-degree murder may be sustained even if the death causing act was directed at a single person" – and argues the court broke with 100 years of precedent in doing so. 

The Noor legal team is asking the Minnesota Supreme Court to revisit the necessary prerequisites for third-degree murder itself, while also seeking to have the court "sufficiently differentiate murder from manslaughter."

 

 

[TwiceHorn 31,434]

7 minutes ago, GringoSalado said:

Believe the SC case is about his 3rd degree murder conviction, no? The part about "eminently dangerous to others" when Noor's dumbassery was only eminenly dangerous to the white woman he was panic shooting.

 

https://www.kare11.com/article/news/crime/noor-legal-team-appeals-third-degree-murder-charge-to-minnesota-supreme-court/89-567efb3b-13e9-46ae-a63f-ad037fd777d7#:~:text=Noor was convicted of second,death of Justine Ruszczyk Damond.&text=MINNEAPOLIS — The Minnesota Supreme Court,former Minneapolis officer Mohamed Noor.

 

 

Yes, that's it.  The real issue on the appeal is how final is the judgment in the Noor case.  The Court of Appeals' judgment in the Noor case supports a 3rd Degree Murder charge in the Chauvin case, but could still be reheard or reversed by the Minnesota Supreme Court.  So the question in the Chauvin appeal was how much weight to give the Noor decision until it becomes indisputably final and settled Minnesota law.

So it would appear that the State values the possibility of any murder conviction over a conviction of the highest charge (2nd Degree Murder), while the defense seems to think there's a decent likelihood the jury may not want to go with the manslaughter charge and thus fears the intermediate murder charge.