The Derek Chauvin Trial

Forums:
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Because the captured-on-video killing of George Floyd sparked a civil rights discussion, protest and movement that spanned the whole globe and woke up millions to the existence of police brutality toward black men; because the findings of the jury in this trial will have repercussions that could affect the perception of the relationship between the US justice system and black people for a generation; because opening arguments are starting this week...

These seemed to me good enough reasons to open a thread about the trial of former Minneapolis police officer Derek M. Chauvin.

It’s potentially very bleak subject matter, so I’ll start by naming the one glimmer of hope I’ve gleaned from what I’ve read and heard about the trial so far.
And that is this : To find someone guilty of murder in the second or third degree does not require that person to be proven to have had intent. For Chauvin to be found guilty of murder, all that’s necessary is that his actions have to be proven to have been a proximate cause of Mr Floyd’s death. I don’t think it should be that hard to prove that a grown man kneeling on someone’s neck for almost nine minutes was as least partially the cause of death.

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 11 • Views: 42,623 • Replies: 1,799

@snood,

You would think so, but the deference shown to police is ridiculous. I'm sure the defense will say Floyd died from a heart attack caused by his resistance to the police or something similar.

2 Replies

@engineer,

engineer wrote:

You would think so, but the deference shown to police is ridiculous. I'm sure the defense will say Floyd died from a heart attack caused by his resistance to the police or something similar.

Yeah, I should have said I hope it won’t be hard to prove.

0 Replies

@engineer,

They are also trying to plant the idea that Floyd had drugs in his system and that contributed to his death. I have a very bad feeling about this, this whole 'underlying condition' is a desperate attempt to make it sound as, IF only he hadn't had a minicule amount of weed or whatever (or nothing) he would have easily survived without oxygen for 9 minutes. I'm expecting to hear outrageous allegations and excuses for Chauvin, that will make me furious or hopeless or both.

2 Replies

@glitterbag,

We can expect all that, but the bottom line is, can they convince the jury that an adult man kneeling on Floyd’s neck could contribute to his demise.

1 Reply

@snood,

Yes, we all saw it........right out in broad daylight.....Yes, the jury can be convinced, but that's not what worries me.

1 Reply

@glitterbag,

I have as much - maybe more - reason to be down about the possible outcome as anyone.

The trial will take the entire month of April. I won’t get through it with any dignity and probably sanity if I give up at the beginning.

I know, I know the history. But let’s at least wait until the end to give up.

0 Replies

@glitterbag,

I hear you, but let's hope Snood's very sane logic wins the day for the whole globe. Be really nice for a change.

But on what you said, it has begun already.

0 Replies

I feel bad for the Jury in this case.

With this politically controversial case that comes with a great deal of public outrage and the possibly for their decision sparking violence.... in the middle of that they have to reach a reasoned decision based only on the facts and evidence provided at trial.

I wouldn't want to be in this position.

0 Replies

Derek Chauvin Trial Live Updates: Lawyers Present Case in George Floyd’s Death

For me, a better way to keep up with the trial.

1 Reply

@revelette3,

I’ll look at summaries if I find I don’t feel like following the slow pace of the trial. But generally I like seeing and hearing the questions and testimony firsthand, so I can have my own interpretations.

0 Replies

Lordy. The young woman the prosecution is questioning now is a former employee of the store that was directly across the street from the incident. She was an eyewitness, and she made a cellphone video. The problem with her though is that she comes across like someone waking up after a two day binge on some substance. “Uh, I don’t remember... uh I can’t think right now.” Wtf

1 Reply

@snood,

Yes, it's painful to watch. She might be terrified of the police.....I'm not saying it would be a good reason, but I worry about what kind of pressure the police may be using on her or her family.

0 Replies

So two autopsies say he died due to asphyxiation and the defense says it was a heart attack?

1 Reply

@engineer,

The defense said there are two sides to every story, right now I think one side is that Cauvin is guilty of murder by asphyxiation and the other side is Cauvin is guilty of smothering a man until his heart stopped.

0 Replies

This thread is getting a little silly. I mean, if we all know he is guilty, why should there even be a trial?

I am serious, what do you think the defense should say (given that our constitutional democracy guarantees the presumption of innocence and the right to mount a strong defense)?

I support a guilty verdict at this point.. but come on! We have a process that gives the best chance at a fair trial. Let's let it play out.

If you are going to whine because the defense is doing its job....

2 Replies

@maxdancona,

Is this your idea of critical thinking? I think you are getting a little silly. Of course there HAS to be a trial. Chauvin might be criminally insane and it's possible he could be cured with the right type of treatment. Mr. Floyd will still be dead, but don't let that detail get in the way.

1 Reply

@glitterbag,

The defense appears to be basing their main argument on the cause of death. They are making the claim that George Floyd's principle cause of death was a heart malady caused by his use of drugs.

The autopsy report said that he had enough fentanyl in his blood to justify a finding of overdose death. The autopsy also said that he had a critical heart condition and that one artery was 75% blocked.

I am not a lawyer, but this seems like a reasonable defense. I assume his lawyers are competent and will mount the best defense they can (as they should).

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

This thread is getting a little silly. I mean, if we all know he is guilty, why should there even be a trial?

I am serious, what do you think the defense should say (given that our constitutional democracy guarantees the presumption of innocence and the right to mount a strong defense)?

I support a guilty verdict at this point.. but come on! We have a process that gives the best chance at a fair trial. Let's let it play out.

If you are going to whine because the defense is doing its job....

Max...
I guess it’s just how you are, and I’m not even sure you know you are doing it, but...

No matter what the issue, no matter what the subject matter, no matter who’s discussing what..,

Whenever you weigh in, you immediately insult somebody’s intelligence and present your opinion as if it’s the only logical one.

The thread isn’t getting “silly”- people are feeling out this very touchy, very incendiary issue. Let them reason it out the way they want without your hectoring and judgement. Your views are no more or less valuable.

We have had only a few hours of a trial that will probably last a
month.
I want people to be able to air their feelings and thoughts about it here. I have a lot I might need to express about it. It’s very possible those thoughts and feelings will go through some changes.

1 Reply

@snood,

Snood, I apologize to you for the "silly" comment. I do not apologize to Glitterbag, but there is history there which you are not a part of and I apologize that I dragged that onto your thread. I don't think your accusation of "every thread" is correct... but I will drop it.

That being said, I do think that any discussion of the trial should explore the issue from multiple sides. There will be a prosecution and a defense. And as much as people want this to be a clear cut case, some of the issues are not going to be that clear cut.

The defense has facts in its favor. So does the prosecution. Let's see what happens.

The jury is duty bound to consider all of the facts. Anyone who wants to understand the trial beyond the political fighting will have to do the same.

1 Reply

Forums
» The Derek Chauvin Trial

Read Discussion
Reply to All

The Derek Chauvin Trial

Quick Links

My Account

able2know