I took the day off work today due to a mild fever from my second COVID vaccination and have been watching the closing arguments in the Derek Chauvin trial.
My thoughts so far:
Chauvin is up against three charges. Second degree murder, Third degree murder and Second degree manslaughter. I will post links to their definitions by the State of Minnesota below.
The States closing argument was pretty much a straightforward summation of the case made by the State, during trial, which relied heavily on Floyd’s continuous pleas that he could not breath and the 9:24 in which officer Chauvin leaned on his neck and how this violated Minneapolis police policies. Nothing earth shattering.
The defense on the other hand was on fire and earned their pay today.
The defense attorney eviscerated the States arguments for Second and Third degree murder.
On the second degree murder count of which part of is the victim must have been assaulted. The evidence provided by the defense that the situation clearly met the policy standards for use of force by a reasonable police officer. With that being the case Chauvin, as a police officer, cannot be charged or guilty of assault.
That takes Second degree murder off the books as without the assault aspect Chauvin doesn’t qualify for that specific charge as no intent by Chauvin to commit a felony occurred. That is to say reasonable doubt has been established for the second degree murder charge.
A similar fate occurred with the third degree murder charge of which a qualifying aspect is Chauvin would have had to act with reckless disregard for human life. The fact that Chauvin attempted to deescalate Floyd’s restraint when his fellow officers requested using leg restraints and were countermanded by Chauvin. Also while restraining Floyd on the ground the officers, with Chauvin’s input, called EMT’s for assistance twice. Those occurances directly contradict a reckless disregard for human life.
In other words that provides significant reasonable doubt for third degree murder.
However the defense arguments against manslaughter I found weak. Their arguments were based largely on the other possible contributing factors to Floyd’s death, such as drug use and medical history in addition to Chauvin’s reactions to the crowd. Their argument was that the contributing factors of Floyd’s death mitigate Chauvin’s actions as a cascade of biological factors resulted in Floyd’s death. I found that a particularly weak argument as that is true about any death which isn’t a result of extreme trauma.
The arguments that Floyd’s actions were in part responsible by the actions of the crowd was also a weak argument as the crowd consisted of approximately 7 people who though vociferous were not particularly aggressive.
The Police vest cameras also clearly show that when Floyd became unconscious one of his fellow officers observed that Floyd was in hypoxic shock and Chauvin concurred with the officer yet continued to kneel on Floyd’s neck.
It is at this point that, IHMO, that Chauvin’s action ceased to be the reasonable actions of a police officer and crossed the boundaries of the law. At this point an unreasonable risk for the loss of Floyd’s risk. That is culpable negligence had occurred. I do not think that the arguments by the defense provide reasonable doubt. Chauvin’s own recognition that Floyd was in hypoxic shock demonstrates he understood clearly the risk involved in continuing to keep kneeling on Floyd’s neck. I think the evidence shows that Floyd died because of Chauvin kneeling on his neck and Chauvin was aware of that risk but continued to do so. I don’t believe his defense provided a reasonable argument for reasonable doubt on second degree manslaughter.
So qualifying my opinions based on the facts provided and yet understanding that the jury may act differently, I think Chauvin will be convicted of manslaughter but found not guilty of second or third degree murder.
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.19
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.195
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.205
Bookmarks