Reply to Thread for Derek Chauvin trial watchers?

Forum Index » Off-Topic

Reply to "Thread for Derek Chauvin trial watchers?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Chauvin will be convicted. There is a video of the entire crime.End of story.[/quote] except Floyd had two illegals drugs in his system, had Covid, had a heart condition. I want him convicted too and think he killed him. But this is why it’s not cut and dry.[/quote]

I think even if he didn't have any drugs the knee on the neck would have killed him.[/quote]

Also, legally, the medical situation of the injured/killed person is not a valid defense to the seriousness of any injury caused to them. If you shoot a person, it doesn't matter that they had terminal cancer or were about to die of an overdose anyway; also maybe they could have been saved, but for you killing them.

[/quote]

Cause of death would matter though, since for murder charges you have to cause that person’s death. This case is probably going to be considerably more complex for jurors medically than a gunshot wound. But under MN law, the action just has to be a substantial contributing factor. So to use the gunshot example, I suppose that would be like if you shot them and they died from complications of the gunshot wound that would generally be survivable, maybe due to medical malpractice or something. It could be a risky case for the prosecutor though in a jury trial and depending on the facts they might stick with a lesser charge or plea.

This case has a ton of evidence though, particularly high quality video evidence. So the facts are much easier to establish compared to many cases.

It seems like Medical Examiner Baker will testify and show that the restraint was a substantial contributing factor, as he ruled in the autopsy. This is probably going to be complex and that can open the door for reasonable doubt. But the prosecutors will work hard to break it down, no doubt.

The other hurdle for the prosecution to clear then is essentially whether it was reasonable. You could commit homicide and not be legally responsible, if your force was justified. I think that the evidence will show the force was not reasonable. The key points being an officer says he can’t find a pulse but Chauvin continues the prone restraint, and the lack of prior violent behavior from GF. If Chauvin had done the prone restraint for a couple minutes and then rolled into a recovery position and attempted first aid, this would be a more defendable case even with the same autopsy ruling. But the lack of action even after another officer states they can’t find a pulse, is a high hurdle for the defense to clear. I don’t think they’re unaware, obviously they were looking at plea deals so they knew there were elements in this case where evidence would not favor the defendant. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics