A Minneapolis police officer was quickly fired and charged with murder after a video of a spectator showed him pressing his knee to George Floyd’s neck, ignoring the black man’s screams that he couldn’t breathe. But even with these powerful images, legal experts say the case is not a straight hit.
The jury selection begins on Monday at the Derek Chauvin trial, which must boil down to two main questions: Did Chauvin’s actions cause Floyd’s death and were his actions reasonable?
“It’s hard not to watch the video and conclude that prosecutors will have no problems with this case,” said Susan Gaertner, the former chief prosecutor for Ramsey’s neighboring county. “But it is not so simple.”
Floyd was pronounced dead on May 25 after Chauvin, who is white, pressed his knee against Floyd’s neck for about nine minutes, maintaining his position even after Floyd went limp while handcuffed and lying on his stomach. Floyd’s death has sometimes sparked violent protests in Minneapolis and beyond, and has led to a national assessment of systemic racism.
Chauvin is accused of second-degree unintentional murder and second-degree manslaughter, and a panel of judges at the appeals court ruled on Friday that the judge should consider reinstating a third-degree murder charge he rejected in the fall. past. Three other police officers, all of whom were also fired, will be tried in August on charges of helping and inciting charges of wrongful death and wrongful death.
The second-degree murder charge requires prosecutors to prove that Chauvin caused Floyd’s death while committing or attempting to commit a crime – in this case, third-degree assault. The wrongful death charge has a lower limit, requiring proof that Chauvin caused Floyd’s death through negligence that created an irrational risk, and knowingly took the chance to cause serious injury or death.
Exactly how Floyd died is becoming a major turning point in the trial.
Chauvin’s lawyer, Eric Nelson, argues in court documents that Floyd probably died of the fentanyl he consumed, or a combination of fentanyl, methamphetamine and underlying health problems – not as a result of Chauvin’s knee in his neck.
But Hennepin County Judge Peter Cahill wrote last fall that, for the second-degree murder charge, prosecutors need not prove that Chauvin was the sole cause of Floyd’s death – only that his conduct was a “factor.” substantial causal “.
Still, defense lawyers who are not connected to the case say that all Nelson needs to do is raise a reasonable doubt in the mind of a single juror.
“Although he immobilized him under his knee and he shouted ‘I can’t breathe! I can not breathe!’ there is an argument that (Chauvin) was not putting pressure on him and his inability to breathe was due to drugs in his system or something, or his anxiety, “said F. Clayton Tyler, a prominent local defense attorney.
3 EX-MINNEAPOLIS COPS LOADED IN THE DEATH OF GEORGE FLOYD ASK THE JUDGE TO DEMIT THE CASE AFTER LEAVE OF PLEA-DEAL
Defense lawyers say it may also not be easy to establish that Chauvin was committing the crime of aggression – as required for the second-degree murder charge in this case. That’s because Chauvin is authorized to use force as a police officer, and his lawyers will argue that the use of force against Floyd was reasonable.
Gaertner said the defense will face the challenge of trying to take the jury’s focus away from the video and the strong emotion it generates. Instead, they will try to focus on Floyd’s medical evidence and underlying conditions while trying to portray the circumstances of the arrest as “justified under police rules,” she said.
Brandt and Tyler said that Chauvin will likely have to testify to explain why he felt he had to hold Floyd so long. Brandt said he will probably say that he followed his training, and that it was necessary because his experience with other suspects under the influence of drugs shows that things can suddenly become erratic and dangerous.
Prosecutors, however, presented a list of previous cases in which Chauvin used bottlenecks or similar restrictions at work. Cahill decided that they can admit only one as evidence: a prison in 2017, in which Chauvin restrained a woman by placing her knee on her neck while she was lying on the floor.
Cahill also determined that prosecutors could tell jurors about a 2015 incident in which Chauvin saw other officers put a drunken suicide man in a recovery position after using a paralyzing weapon against him. Cahill said prosecutors could present this if they could show that Chauvin was present when a medical professional said the man could have died if the police had prolonged his detention.
Brandt said that telling the jury about these events will allow prosecutors to show that Chauvin knew the proper way to contain someone and provide relief, and that he had done it wrongly before.
Brandt said the third-degree murder charge may be easier for prosecutors to prove if it is reinstated, because they would not have to show that Chauvin intended to commit aggression. Instead, they must prove that their actions caused Floyd’s death, and that they were reckless and disregarded for human life.
The second-degree manslaughter count alleges that Chauvin took a risk that a reasonable person would know could cause death. To defend himself against this, Brandt said, Chauvin could argue that he had used the same scam in the past and did not think it would cause a problem.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APPLICATION
However, Brandt said that “the whole case” against Chauvin is the video that captures the amount of time he has contained Floyd.
“You hear passersby in the video, viewers saying, ‘Man, he can’t breathe. Let him go. What are you doing? You’re killing him,'” said Brandt. “I mean, it’s almost like they’re giving a detailed presentation.”
Tyler said that if he were a prosecutor, he would use a static image of Chauvin’s expressionless face from that video and keep it in sight for the jury to see.
“I mean, the expression on his face,” said Tyler. “If I were suing this case, I must say that I would have that photo up there. Do you want to show indifference? Just look at it.”