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]IMO it seems like the defense is using multiple strategies. His history, drug use, underlying conditions but most importantly the paramedics moving to a new location was bc they felt it wasn't safe. That gives support to the idea that the police were too distracted by the surroundings. Also that by moving GF they delayed necessary medical support that could have saved him. Add in that the Firefighter EMS weren't updated on the new location. 
They are making it seem like it was a variety of factors. He directly asked whether the paramedic was able to insert the gel thing in the airway and whether there was any compression or resistance or injuries to the neck. 
I mean I really don't understand why you would get arrested without evidence of forgery. I also don't understand why he wasn't given an opportunity to take a breath and calmly discuss getting into the car. Do they not have transport vans that could have been called? Why not just give him a minute- he's handcuffed. [/quote]

The overall defense strategy seems kind of like “this case is more complicated than what you’ve heard” and to some extent “it’s less reasonable to second guess someone who is in a uniquely stressful/complex position.” All or almost all of the jurors knew about George Floyd prior to the case. Jurors aren’t excluded based on knowledge of the case, but are asked if they can put what opinions they’ve already formed aside and follow the law and the evidence as presented at trial. Compared to the vast majority of trials, though, jurors obviously had more exposure to the case and during jury selection, Nelson would say for example “would you believe that there’s more to the story than what you’ve been told” etc.

Nelson is trying to create reasonable doubt. Chauvin doesn’t really have a bombshell defense here, at least not one I can see. Although a lot of people on the internet seemingly thought Nelson could just go with “the drugs killed him” that’s not really how it works, because of the autopsy and medical examiner testimony, it would discredit the defense to rely on that like a single defense. The drugs are not a defense per se, but might create some reasonable doubt. Highlighting complexities is a defense strategy to create reasonable doubt.

As far as the arrest, I think the full body cam footage shows that Lane most likely had probable cause to make an arrest on suspicion of drug possession after he approached the car. I don’t know MN drug possession laws, and I don’t know how Minneapolis police typically handle basic possession cases, but it is possibly relevant that Floyd was in the driver’s seat. I think there are some valid questions about whether an experienced officer would have handled it that way and definitely valid whether it was the right way to handle it vs just watching him and calling EMS. The forgery evidence could have been handled later. Having two officers together on their first or second day is probably not a best practice and likely one factor in how this spiraled out of control. I agree, once he’s cuffed, letting him stay on the sidewalk to wait for EMS/backup could have been an option. When the car thing escalated, and back up arrived, rolling him into a recovery position and attempting first aid could and should have been a reasonable option. The initial arrest might not be a huge focus of this trial, since it happened before Chauvin was there.

[/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