Thread for Derek Chauvin trial watchers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anyone watching the sentencing?

My prediction: 10 years (max is 30)

Although the sentence has already been announced, for those who are interested or confused by the potential ranges:

MN has sentencing guidelines that judges follow. https://mn.gov/msgc-stat/documents/Guidelines/2020/2020StandardSentencingGuidelinesGrid.pdf

The standard sentencing guidelines that would have applied to Chauvin are in the second row, column 0 (criminal history score). 128-180 months.

However, the state can argue for an upward departure and did so in this case. To do that, there are certain factors that have to be established. They cited 5 factors here (https://mncourts.gov/mncourtsgov/media/High-Profile-Cases/27-CR-20-12646/MCRO_27-CR-20-12646_Memorandum_2021-04-30_20210430160827.pdf)

Judge Cahill found in favor of 4 factors here (https://mncourts.gov/mncourtsgov/media/High-Profile-Cases/27-CR-20-12646/Order05112021.pdf):

1. Defendant abused position of power/authority

2. Victim treated with particular cruelty

3. Children were present

4. Defendant committed crime as a group with three or more active participants (note: I found this pretty surprising at the time because the other potential defendants are pre-trial though the decision says “no finding is made to intent and knowledge” of the others. Still it’s probably something that lawyers for Thao, Keung, and Lane will revisit)

This finding established the upward departure from the guidelines sentences of approx 10-12 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Perfectly fine I think. Of course CNN is going on and on about how it's a light sentence bc he'll only serve 2/3 of it (you can get 1/3 of a sentence reduced in Minn for good behavior) blah blah. But even in 15 yrs, he'll be 60 -- he gets out as a senior citizen. Perfectly fine sentence.

It doesn't do much for precedent. Now no other prosecution will be able to support asking for more than 25 years in any case (assuming no murder-by-police case will ever have as uncontroverted and horrible facts). It could have bee 100 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone watching the sentencing?

My prediction: 10 years (max is 30)

Although the sentence has already been announced, for those who are interested or confused by the potential ranges:

MN has sentencing guidelines that judges follow. https://mn.gov/msgc-stat/documents/Guidelines/2020/2020StandardSentencingGuidelinesGrid.pdf

The standard sentencing guidelines that would have applied to Chauvin are in the second row, column 0 (criminal history score). 128-180 months.

However, the state can argue for an upward departure and did so in this case. To do that, there are certain factors that have to be established. They cited 5 factors here (https://mncourts.gov/mncourtsgov/media/High-Profile-Cases/27-CR-20-12646/MCRO_27-CR-20-12646_Memorandum_2021-04-30_20210430160827.pdf)

Judge Cahill found in favor of 4 factors here (https://mncourts.gov/mncourtsgov/media/High-Profile-Cases/27-CR-20-12646/Order05112021.pdf):

1. Defendant abused position of power/authority

2. Victim treated with particular cruelty

3. Children were present

4. Defendant committed crime as a group with three or more active participants (note: I found this pretty surprising at the time because the other potential defendants are pre-trial though the decision says “no finding is made to intent and knowledge” of the others. Still it’s probably something that lawyers for Thao, Keung, and Lane will revisit)

This finding established the upward departure from the guidelines sentences of approx 10-12 years.

TV talking head expert just said any for of these factors could have quadrupled the sentence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perfectly fine I think. Of course CNN is going on and on about how it's a light sentence bc he'll only serve 2/3 of it (you can get 1/3 of a sentence reduced in Minn for good behavior) blah blah. But even in 15 yrs, he'll be 60 -- he gets out as a senior citizen. Perfectly fine sentence.

It doesn't do much for precedent. Now no other prosecution will be able to support asking for more than 25 years in any case (assuming no murder-by-police case will ever have as uncontroverted and horrible facts). It could have bee 100 years.

Okay, then maybe other things should change because a murderer should not get the same sentence as many other non-violent offenders. and 60--you act like that is the end of life. Good lord how old and callous are you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perfectly fine I think. Of course CNN is going on and on about how it's a light sentence bc he'll only serve 2/3 of it (you can get 1/3 of a sentence reduced in Minn for good behavior) blah blah. But even in 15 yrs, he'll be 60 -- he gets out as a senior citizen. Perfectly fine sentence.

It doesn't do much for precedent. Now no other prosecution will be able to support asking for more than 25 years in any case (assuming no murder-by-police case will ever have as uncontroverted and horrible facts). It could have bee 100 years.

Actually it does do something. He essentially choked the guy to death. I think shootings could potentially get more.

In any case I am happy with the 15 years because it’s finally setting a precedent for locking up killer cops and if he’s sentenced to consecutive years for the tax evasion - that’s great too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

This finding established the upward departure from the guidelines sentences of approx 10-12 years.

TV talking head expert just said any for of these factors could have quadrupled the sentence.

Not sure if they meant legally or morally. There is still a statutory maximum.

Theoretically he could have been sentenced to something higher if he was prosecuted and convicted of first degree murder. But he was not.

Note that a federal grand jury has indicted these defendants on federal civil rights charges. This is still the beginning, or maybe the middle, of Chauvin’s legal battle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perfectly fine I think. Of course CNN is going on and on about how it's a light sentence bc he'll only serve 2/3 of it (you can get 1/3 of a sentence reduced in Minn for good behavior) blah blah. But even in 15 yrs, he'll be 60 -- he gets out as a senior citizen. Perfectly fine sentence.

It doesn't do much for precedent. Now no other prosecution will be able to support asking for more than 25 years in any case (assuming no murder-by-police case will ever have as uncontroverted and horrible facts). It could have bee 100 years.

What they can do would be highly affected by the statutes, procedures, and case law in their state (both in terms of what the defendant can be prosecuted for, and what the sentencing factors would be). Case law or precedent in MN will not affect a defendant in NY.

Federal civil rights charges and sentencing would establish a better pattern of what could happen “anywhere.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perfectly fine I think. Of course CNN is going on and on about how it's a light sentence bc he'll only serve 2/3 of it (you can get 1/3 of a sentence reduced in Minn for good behavior) blah blah. But even in 15 yrs, he'll be 60 -- he gets out as a senior citizen. Perfectly fine sentence.

It doesn't do much for precedent. Now no other prosecution will be able to support asking for more than 25 years in any case (assuming no murder-by-police case will ever have as uncontroverted and horrible facts). It could have bee 100 years.

Actually it does do something. He essentially choked the guy to death. I think shootings could potentially get more.

In any case I am happy with the 15 years because it’s finally setting a precedent for locking up killer cops and if he’s sentenced to consecutive years for the tax evasion - that’s great too.

A jury will decide but if I'm a lawyer (oh, wait, I am), it's harder to explain away the intentioned kneeling on a neck for 10 minutes and slowing and literally squeezing the life out of someone (over an alleged $20 counterfeit bill) vs say the instant decision to size up danger to others in a tense situation, maybe where the suspect has already shot others, and pull a trigger one time that takes a nano second.

So, no, I'm not "happy" with 15 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This finding established the upward departure from the guidelines sentences of approx 10-12 years.

TV talking head expert just said any for of these factors could have quadrupled the sentence.

Not sure if they meant legally or morally. There is still a statutory maximum.

Theoretically he could have been sentenced to something higher if he was prosecuted and convicted of first degree murder. But he was not.

Note that a federal grand jury has indicted these defendants on federal civil rights charges. This is still the beginning, or maybe the middle, of Chauvin’s legal battle.
I thought the guy had some expertise in sentencing guidelines when he said any one of the factors could have kicked in the sentencing multiplier (the judge found 4 such factors)

[Anonymous]

Will we start hearing from the jurors soon? I'm really interested in hearing their reaction to the verdict and also hearing what they have to say.

[Anonymous]

22 1/2 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This finding established the upward departure from the guidelines sentences of approx 10-12 years.

TV talking head expert just said any for of these factors could have quadrupled the sentence.

Not sure if they meant legally or morally. There is still a statutory maximum.

Theoretically he could have been sentenced to something higher if he was prosecuted and convicted of first degree murder. But he was not.

Note that a federal grand jury has indicted these defendants on federal civil rights charges. This is still the beginning, or maybe the middle, of Chauvin’s legal battle.

I thought the guy had some expertise in sentencing guidelines when he said any one of the factors could have kicked in the sentencing multiplier (the judge found 4 such factors)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m worried about Chauvin’s safety in prison. I can’t imagine what he’s feeling tonight. (K, flame me for sympathy for the devil, whatever. I like to look at things from the other side.)

Eric Nelson looked close to tears after the verdict—his glasses were even a little foggy. I can’t imagine what he feels either.

You can worry for both of us, because I am utterly unconcerned about how Chauvin will fare in prison.

I pity Chauvin, but he had a very long time to make his choice the day he knelt on Floyd's neck and killed him, so it's more of a sadness that he did this to himself when there were so many other choices he could have made.

That's it. It was never about race, just a overly aggressive guy who I believe wanted to show off to his subordinates. On how to subdue a combative guy on drugs with a criminal history.
Chauvin had a few things in his past that should have had him weeded out. It's sad for both men that made poor choices in life.

🙄 Chauvin didn't have to think to himself "I'm going to kill this guy because he's black" for this to have been about race. The willful ignorance of people who think like you is so exhausting.

Exactly. This was never about race, only the media and the agenda police. An overly aggressive cop who meets a combative druggie felon is never going to end well.

The ignorance of people like you that claim racism in every case involving a cop is what's exhausting. And it continues to provide a false political narrative which isn't helpful. It also deflects from the real issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This finding established the upward departure from the guidelines sentences of approx 10-12 years.

TV talking head expert just said any for of these factors could have quadrupled the sentence.

Not sure if they meant legally or morally. There is still a statutory maximum.

Theoretically he could have been sentenced to something higher if he was prosecuted and convicted of first degree murder. But he was not.

Note that a federal grand jury has indicted these defendants on federal civil rights charges. This is still the beginning, or maybe the middle, of Chauvin’s legal battle.

I thought the guy had some expertise in sentencing guidelines when he said any one of the factors could have kicked in the sentencing multiplier (the judge found 4 such factors)

Here is a link to Judge Cahill’s sentencing order: https://mncourts.gov/mncourtsgov/media/High-Profile-Cases/27-CR-20-12646/MCRO_27-CR-20-12646_Sentencing-Order_2021-06-25_20210625145755.pdf

It goes into detail about sentencing guidelines, sentencing departures, and also reiterates the findings about the factors that justified a sentencing departure in this case.

When the state filed for an upward departure, they asked the judge for a 30 year sentence. This would be the statutory maximum for unintentional 2nd degree murder in MN.

Page 19 goes into more detail about how the departure works. One or more factors is sufficient for a departure but they really don’t work the way you’re describing. The departure is from the presumptive guidelines sentence, but there is still a statutory maximum.

Quoting from page 19 of the above linked document (bolded by me):

When a sentencing trial court has found that one or more aggravated factors are present, the court may, in the exercise of its discretion if substantial and compelling circumstances warrant, impose a sentence that is up to “double the presumptive sentence length.” State v. Evans, 311 N.W.2d 481, 483 (Minn. 1981). The existence of a single aggravating factor is sufficient to justify the imposition of a sentence “double the upper limit of the presumptive range.” Barthman, 938 N.W.2d at 269, 275; see also State v. Solberg, 882 N.W.2d 618, 624 (Minn. 2016) (“[W]e have affirmed upward durational departures that were based on a single aggravating factor.”); State v. Gaines, 408 N.W.2d 914, 918 (Minn. App. 1987) (finding double upward departure appropriate where only one aggravating factor applied). Here, the State is asking this Court to sentence Mr. Chauvin to 360 months, which represents a double upward durational departure from the 180 months at the “top of the box” of the presumptive guidelines range.

If the judge ordered a sentence of 100 years by using the factors as a multiplier outside of the statutory maximum, then it would be successfully appealed. It’s not going to happen like that.

But he could have sentenced Chauvin to 30 years. As for why he didn’t, he goes into analysis on pages 20-21 using precedent of other upward departures to establish why he chose to impose a sentence of ten years above the “middle of the box” guidelines sentence.

So perhaps the person on CNN meant that only one factor needed to be found in order for him to get that sentence (which implies that arguing on appeal won’t be that easy, because you would have to successfully argue all four are wrong). Or maybe they don’t understand that no one was ever arguing for more than the statutory max (30 years).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^Okay 12:26. Please tell us what the real issues are?

All part of the plan. Dismantle the police force make everything about race. Destabilize the country. Allow rioting. All that pent up rage about COVID shut down directed to destabilization. Why does the death of one junkie matter so much ?

It never did. This case was merely used by the far left for their political agenda which is backfiring. Crime is up and they are killing their own.