The Trial of Derek Chauvin

[Brisketexan 105154]

2 minutes ago, Red Five said:

I honestly don't think he was trying to kill him. But I don't think he really cared all that much if he did either, if that's a distinction that makes sense. 

I think the rubicon was crossed when he was informed by the crowd TELLING him that he was killing Floyd....and knowing that, Chauvin doubled down.  At that point, it changed from being reckless to intentional.  It didn't start out that way.  But it sure as shit ended that way.

[gsoda3 3262]

he's facing 3 charges:

1.  2nd degree unintentional felony murder
2.  3rd degree "depraved mind" murder
3.  2nd degree manslaughter

 

i think it fits the definition of third degree murder in minnesota.  

Quote

Depraved mind murder (or depraved heart murder as it is sometimes referred to) is a type of third-degree murder in Minnesota. Minnesota’s statute for depraved mind murder reads, “whoever, without intent…causes the death of another by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life…” is guilty of depraved mind murder. ¹ Charging a person with depraved mind murder relies on the assumption that there are reckless acts so dangerous that a person should be charged with murder if another person dies while you are engaging in them.

Examples of depraved mind murder include violently driving an automobile ², the accidental discharge of a gun during a fight³, and Mohammed Noor’s widely publicized charge of shooting a woman while on duty as a police officer.

the other officers' testimonies saying the knee on neck isn't part of their training should be sufficient to classify it as a reckless act.

 

 

that white girl chop shooting duane wright, that's 2nd degree manslaughter.  

Quote

609.205 MANSLAUGHTER IN THE SECOND DEGREE.

A person who causes the death of another by any of the following means is guilty of manslaughter in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than ten years or to payment of a fine of not more than $20,000, or both:

(1) by the person's culpable negligence whereby the person creates an unreasonable risk, and consciously takes chances of causing death or great bodily harm to another;

 

[Brisketexan 105154]

2 minutes ago, gsoda3 said:

he's facing 3 charges:

1.  2nd degree unintentional felony murder
2.  3rd degree "depraved mind" murder
3.  2nd degree manslaughter

 

i think it fits the definition of third degree murder in minnesota.  

the other officers' testimonies saying the knee on neck isn't part of their training should be sufficient to classify it as a reckless act.

 

 

that white girl chop shooting duane wright, that's 2nd degree manslaughter.  

 

Good take.

[WhatTheBuck 28788]

3 hours ago, hayden_horn said:

interesting to me that the judge is giving the jury the weekend.

If Chauvin is acquitted, maybe there will be less damage from the resulting riots if the verdict comes out on Monday rather than just before the weekend. 

[High Plains Drifter 11050]

56 minutes ago, gsoda3 said:

he's facing 3 charges:

1.  2nd degree unintentional felony murder
2.  3rd degree "depraved mind" murder
3.  2nd degree manslaughter

 

i think it fits the definition of third degree murder in minnesota.  

the other officers' testimonies saying the knee on neck isn't part of their training should be sufficient to classify it as a reckless act.

 

 

that white girl chop shooting duane wright, that's 2nd degree manslaughter.  

 

 

So if most of the jury is agreeing on 2nd degree murder, and one hold out is saying 2nd degree manslaughter, is that a hung jury, or is he guilty of the lesser charge?

 

[Jkwellborn 6708]

If Chauvin is acquitted, maybe there will be less damage from the resulting riots if the verdict comes out on Monday rather than just before the weekend. 

I’d wage plenty of the ones that are tearing shit up ain’t going to work the next day anyway.

[WhatTheBuck 28788]

8 minutes ago, Jkwellborn said:

I’d wage plenty of the ones that are tearing shit up ain’t going to work the next day anyway.

Of course you think that because you’re an idiot and a racist and use the word “ain’t” in a non-ironic way.

[GopherRock 1765]

Charge conference going on right now on the streams. IIRC this is the part where the attorneys hash out the jury instructions. I think the judge may have been expecting a lot of detail work on this, hence why he sent the jury home when defense was done.

[Jkwellborn 6708]

Of course you think that because you’re an idiot and a racist and use the word “ain’t” in a non-ironic way.

Did I hurt your feelings? There was absolutely no mention of race brought up, except by you.

[workswithseed 2112]

22 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Of course you think that because you’re an idiot and a racist and use the word “ain’t” in a non-ironic way.

Go fuck a burning couch for saying "ain't" isn't a fine word. 

Edited April 15, 2021 by workswithseed

[atomheartbevo 89720]

[JBJ 3655]

5 hours ago, GopherRock said:

Defense rests.

Dr Tobin back on the stand, and the State did some serious tap-dancing to not end in an immediate mistrial. 

I just hit this point.  My heart is going 1000 bpm.  He had to avoid one thing and it seemed like he was going to say it.  

Edited April 15, 2021 by JBJ

[workswithseed 2112]

2 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

What is that from?

[gsoda3 3262]

 
So if most of the jury is agreeing on 2nd degree murder, and one hold out is saying 2nd degree manslaughter, is that a hung jury, or is he guilty of the lesser charge?
 

Not a lawyer, but I believe usually the jurors would all agree to the lesser charge. If for whatever reason one of those who voted guilty for 2nd degree murder voted not guilty for manslaughter and continued to vote not guilty it would result in a hung jury.

[JBJ 3655]

3 hours ago, gsoda3 said:

7 hours ago, High Plains Drifter said:

 
So if most of the jury is agreeing on 2nd degree murder, and one hold out is saying 2nd degree manslaughter, is that a hung jury, or is he guilty of the lesser charge?
 

Not a lawyer, but I believe usually the jurors would all agree to the lesser charge. If for whatever reason one of those who voted guilty for 2nd degree murder voted not guilty for manslaughter and continued to vote not guilty it would result in a hung jury.

It is a hung jury if they can't render a verdict on all 3 charges even if they all agree on manslaughter.

That doesn't necessarily mean they all agree, but I think that's what the question meant.

Edited April 16, 2021 by JBJ

[Pato del Muerto 52514]

3 hours ago, workswithseed said:

What is that from?

I ain’t know. 
 

shit i goes it don’t work for do not. 

[atomheartbevo 89720]

4 hours ago, workswithseed said:

What is that from?

 

[immortal13 4059]

10 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

I think the rubicon was crossed when he was informed by the crowd TELLING him that he was killing Floyd....and knowing that, Chauvin doubled down.  At that point, it changed from being reckless to intentional.  It didn't start out that way.  But it sure as shit ended that way.

The only thing that makes me disagree with this is the fact that he also knew he was being videotaped. Just doesn't make sense to me

[Incredulity 11675]

10 hours ago, immortal13 said:

The only thing that makes me disagree with this is the fact that he also knew he was being videotaped. Just doesn't make sense to me

A.) he is a complete psycho and thought he could get away with it

or

B.) he didn't think it would kill GF

[Eskimohorn 5635]

Whats ghoulish is how many different ways Chauvin killed GF:

1) As a result of excessive force after GF was handcuffed and facedown on the ground while the cops were on top of him. Beyond scope of duty.

2) Literally choking the life out of him to make him lose consciousness.

3) Throw in accidental given GF’s pre-existing health issues and potential OD

4) Continuing to crush him while he was unconscious

5) Continuing to crush him post-mortem (is this right?)

6) Preventing or delaying aid from being rendered for a distressed suspect in custody

7) Not rendering aid for distressed suspect in custody

Its hard to keep track. What am I missing?

[Wulaw Horn 19077]

On 4/15/2021 at 2:03 PM, gsoda3 said:

he's facing 3 charges:

1.  2nd degree unintentional felony murder
2.  3rd degree "depraved mind" murder
3.  2nd degree manslaughter

 

i think it fits the definition of third degree murder in minnesota.  

the other officers' testimonies saying the knee on neck isn't part of their training should be sufficient to classify it as a reckless act.

 

 

that white girl chop shooting duane wright, that's 2nd degree manslaughter.  

 

Go back and forth on the depraved heart. Typically that comes from doing a wildly dangerous act (firing into a crowd, driving like a total lunatic etc) where collateral damage is really likely to happen. It just doesn’t feel like it fits in this situation with the examples of why the statute is typically applied- when it’s a knee to the person who does indeed die. I’d like to see if this type of thing has ever been used to convict of depraved heart murder- that’s not how that statute is taught in law school or on law and order. 
Have zero idea what to do with taser/gun lady. That one seems to me to fall under cops are incredibly shitty at when to use tasers. My understanding is that they are only supposed to be used when a situation would allow you to use a gun. So maybe that case ignores use of gun accidentally instead of taser. 
No idea how that gets handled. 

[Wulaw Horn 19077]

22 hours ago, GopherRock said:

Charge conference going on right now on the streams. IIRC this is the part where the attorneys hash out the jury instructions. I think the judge may have been expecting a lot of detail work on this, hence why he sent the jury home when defense was done.

I would have to think so. If the jury didn’t come into this case with their mind made up one way or another I’d posit that the jury instructions are the most important thing that happens in this entire case. 

[Wulaw Horn 19077]

On 4/15/2021 at 1:23 PM, Lobo said:

The thread vibe is that the cop is toast.  35% of the adult U.S. population says the cop is a hero and black people should learn to obey better.  

Thankfully, the U.S. Judicial System is a hint more pragmatic.  He'll get convicted of a lesser charge and likely do every day of the sentence.  

I always thought this thing felt like manslaughter being the likely endpoint  of not murder (he didn’t mean to do it) vs got to punish this behavior from a cop. 
Will be interested to see the result. I will find it sickening if he walks completely and would also be incredibly surprised by that result. I think it’s probably manslaughter. I haven’t followed enough to feel strongly about whether the jury can/should/will go for second murder. 

[GringoSalado 1651]

2 hours ago, Wulaw Horn said:

I would have to think so. If the jury didn’t come into this case with their mind made up one way or another I’d posit that the jury instructions are the most important thing that happens in this entire case. 

Yeah, like to see how they deal with the 3rd degree "eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind" part.

NAL.

[scottsins 1967]

20 hours ago, JBJ said:

It is a hung jury if they can't render a verdict on all 3 charges even if they all agree on manslaughter.

That doesn't necessarily mean they all agree, but I think that's what the question meant.

If the jury is unanimous as to one of the lesser included charges, then you have a proper verdict for that charge, regardless of the split/ unanimity for the higher charges.

[Not a cat 5659]

4 hours ago, Wulaw Horn said:

My understanding is that they are only supposed to be used when a situation would allow you to use a gun. So maybe that case ignores use of gun accidentally instead of taser. 
No idea how that gets handled. 

Not a cop but I think allowable use of tazer is much more expansive than gun. I mean nobody seemed to blink when she was yelling tazer, but they all went holy shit when they realized she had shot a gun.

[Wulaw Horn 19077]

8 minutes ago, Not a cat said:

Not a cop but I think allowable use of tazer is much more expansive than gun. I mean nobody seemed to blink when she was yelling tazer, but they all went holy shit when they realized she had shot a gun.

I e read before that they are trained to only use the taser in a situation where it would be allowable to use the gun. I know that’s not how it operates in reality but my understanding is that that is their training. It was a long time ago I read that- maybe I’m wrong. 

[UT_OB1 2224]

On 4/15/2021 at 10:31 AM, GopherRock said:

Defense rests.

Dr Tobin back on the stand, and the State did some serious tap-dancing to not end in an immediate mistrial. 

Didn’t see it.  Can you explain in non lawyery terms?

[Parliament 14260]

Do we have any idea when both sides are gonna be done and the jury will deliberate?

[tigol 2398]

 

[TexasHooch 5122]

2 hours ago, Parliament said:

Do we have any idea when both sides are gonna be done and the jury will deliberate?

My understanding is that closing arguments are expected to occur on Monday.  Deliberations will begin immediately after.  

[Parliament 14260]

And deliberation will take between 1 day and what?  10 days?

[SKJ 1311]

On 4/15/2021 at 3:00 PM, WhatTheBuck said:

If Chauvin is acquitted, maybe there will be less damage from the resulting riots if the verdict comes out on Monday rather than just before the weekend. 

Gqp/ it's not like they have jobs/ Gqp

[bernorange 8362]

On 4/15/2021 at 4:04 PM, JBJ said:

I just hit this point.  My heart is going 1000 bpm.  He had to avoid one thing and it seemed like he was going to say it.  

[SquishMitten 10413]

I really hate the depraved heart/mind statutes. That word just has too much connotation, and I think people are reluctant to apply it to certain defendants, particularly cops.

I think there’s also still a question about whether it’s even applicable since there’s debate about the definition of “others” (eminently dangerous to others). I.e., does the use of the plural mean it has to be a non-specific group of people? Or can it apply to a specific, singular “other” person.

[JBJ 3655]

On 4/16/2021 at 11:41 PM, UT_OB1 said:

Didn’t see it.  Can you explain in non lawyery terms?

The State was given a carbon monoxide blood test but not in time to disclose to the defense.  The state tried to get the judge to enter it into evidence in discussions that morning, but the judge made it thouroughly clear that wasn't going to happen and that any witness mentioning that one exists would force a mistrial.

First real question they ask the witness, he mentions the blood test panel (without really mentioning the carbon monoxide test specifically or levels).  The judge calls for a sidebar, and that's all we know.

[GopherRock 1765]

18 minutes ago, JBJ said:

The State was given a carbon monoxide blood test but not in time to disclose to the defense.  The state tried to get the judge to enter it into evidence in discussions that morning, but the judge made it thouroughly clear that wasn't going to happen and that any witness mentioning that one exists would force a mistrial.

First real question they ask the witness, he mentions the blood test panel (without really mentioning the carbon monoxide test specifically or levels).  The judge calls for a sidebar, and that's all we know.

After the sidebar, the questioning seemed to focus on another blood test that was already in evidence. Gist of the rebuttal testimony was 

Today is it. Jury instructions, then closing arguments. After that, it's as long as it takes for the jury to reach a verdict.

[FORTY NINE TO ZERO 2652]

I just heard on the radio that there is a chance of a mistrial due to witness tampering (dead pig head left at house). Is that realistic?  
 

what a shitshow. 

[BurntOrange&White 39934]

4 minutes ago, Xian said:

I just heard on the radio that there is a chance of a mistrial due to witness tampering (dead pig head left at house). Is that realistic?  
 

what a shitshow. 

wait, link?

[Texas St. Armadillos 1381]

I saw the craw on the Today show that there was pig's blood spattered on the home of one of the defense witnesses.

[BurntOrange&White 39934]

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2021/04/19/chauvin-trial-defense-witness-barry-brodds-former-house-vandalized/7282087002/

[TwiceHorn 31495]

On 4/16/2021 at 2:35 PM, Wulaw Horn said:

Go back and forth on the depraved heart. Typically that comes from doing a wildly dangerous act (firing into a crowd, driving like a total lunatic etc) where collateral damage is really likely to happen. It just doesn’t feel like it fits in this situation with the examples of why the statute is typically applied- when it’s a knee to the person who does indeed die. I’d like to see if this type of thing has ever been used to convict of depraved heart murder- that’s not how that statute is taught in law school or on law and order. 
Have zero idea what to do with taser/gun lady. That one seems to me to fall under cops are incredibly shitty at when to use tasers. My understanding is that they are only supposed to be used when a situation would allow you to use a gun. So maybe that case ignores use of gun accidentally instead of taser. 
No idea how that gets handled. 

That was actually the subject of the appeal.  The question was whether "depraved heart" required an action that was gravely reckless to "the public at large" versus the victim.  Believing it to be the former, the judge had excluded that charge before trial.  The court of appeals held it to include just the victim in another case and there was a question whether that decision was sufficiently final to merit putting it back in this case.

Edit to add: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/minnesota-supreme-court-rejects-derek-chauvin-appeal-opening-door-for-another-murder-charge-in-george-floyd-s-death/ar-BB1esz7Y

And it looks like the MN Supreme Court declined to review the appeals court decision in question, making the charge fairly undoubtedly appropriate.

Edited April 19, 2021 by TwiceHorn

[TwiceHorn 31495]

22 hours ago, SquishMitten said:

I really hate the depraved heart/mind statutes. That word just has too much connotation, and I think people are reluctant to apply it to certain defendants, particularly cops.

I think there’s also still a question about whether it’s even applicable since there’s debate about the definition of “others” (eminently dangerous to others). I.e., does the use of the plural mean it has to be a non-specific group of people? Or can it apply to a specific, singular “other” person.

Agreed, it has a connotation different from its actual meaning.  Just say recklessly, or grossly negligently, or something else.

[BurntOrange&White 39934]

[GopherRock 1765]

Judge reading the instructions. He is not in the mood to fuck around today.

[Wulaw Horn 19077]

13 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

That was actually the subject of the appeal.  The question was whether "depraved heart" required an action that was gravely reckless to "the public at large" versus the victim.  Believing it to be the former, the judge had excluded that charge before trial.  The court of appeals held it to include just the victim in another case and there was a question whether that decision was sufficiently final to merit putting it back in this case.

Edit to add: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/minnesota-supreme-court-rejects-derek-chauvin-appeal-opening-door-for-another-murder-charge-in-george-floyd-s-death/ar-BB1esz7Y

And it looks like the MN Supreme Court declined to review the appeals court decision in question, making the charge fairly undoubtedly appropriate.

So one other instance in Mn- I guess that means this is a statute that would apply in an instance like this maybe a couple dozen times ever?  That’s a thin reed to my way of thinking, but ok, not totally unprecedented. 
thanks for the link man. 

[Wulaw Horn 19077]

15 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

I absolutely cannot see any reasonable justification for letting him walk on manslaughter 2 outside of just a hard on for cops/law and order 

[TwiceHorn 31495]

6 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

So one other instance in Mn- I guess that means this is a statute that would apply in an instance like this maybe a couple dozen times ever?  That’s a thin reed to my way of thinking, but ok, not totally unprecedented. 
thanks for the link man. 

It's a goofy-ass interpretation, if you ask me, especially since the statute itself says "eminently dangerous to others," which seems to render nugatory the depraved mind lingo.

Haha.  Nugatory.  I have practiced the law for nearly 30 years without using that word.  Why not on the shag?

[Cajun 11714]

23 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Manslaughter 2 item 3 tells me all I need to know about Minnesota.

People watch a lot of fucking McGyver.

Edited April 19, 2021 by Cajun

[MonkeyDoughnut 10296]

53 minutes ago, Xian said:

I just heard on the radio that there is a chance of a mistrial due to witness tampering (dead pig head left at house). Is that realistic?  
 

what a shitshow. 

I definitely would not want to be sitting on that jury.  I would think appeal is highly likely given all that's going on.  You've got mob like scenes with elected officials making this a pressure cooker situation.