Unfortunately, I doubt that the justice system today has such integrity when it involves racial issues.
The lawyers for Derek Chauvin, the former Minneapolis police officer convicted of second-degree murder, third-degree murder, and second-degree manslaughter after his white knee appeared to be the proximate cause of black petty hood George Floyd in May 2020, have filed an appeal brief.
Let’s see, what have they got…
- His lawyers argue that Chauvin never had a chance to receive a fair trial. Ya think? How could anyone claim otherwise?
- They argued that the nationwide riots poisoned the jury pool. Yes, they did. How could they not?
- The well-publicized threat that the rioting would resume and escalate Chauvin were found not guilty virtually guaranteed Chauvin’s conviction. Well, I know I assumed it would. Didn’t you? The brief argues that no circumstance could be “more prejudicial … than that of a juror discovering that the City he or she resides in is bracing for a riot … in the event the defendant on whose jury you sit is acquitted.”
- The brief says that the news media and law enforcement tainted the proceedings by glorifying Floyd and demonizing Chauvin. That’s a fair description.
The brief condemns the state’s expediting the legal process against Chauvin instead of permitting a “cooling period.” “It is not mere speculation to anticipate that allowing a longer, reasonable duration of time would allow the community to feel less of the pressure from fallout from the Floyd riots,” the brief states. That states the obvious. It is also obvious that Black Lives Matter, activists and anti-police groups wanted Chauvin’s head on a pike so they could claim a victory. (No one ever had produced any evidence that Floyd’s death arose from racial bias.)
The brief objects to the fact that juror Brandon Mitchell lied on the pre-trial jury questionnaire “regarding his views of the case and the extent of his activism.” Mitchell checked “No” when asked whether he had ever advocated for police reform or demonstrated “about police use of force or police brutality,” but Mitchell actively participated in at least one George Floyd-themed demonstration and was photographed wearing a t-shirt that read, “BLM : Get Your Knee Off Our Necks.” Mitchell says he “forgot.” Right.
I have no liking for Derek Chauvin, but he was railroaded and sacrificed to a national race freak-out. It was an outrageously unfair trial, and he deserves a new one. Unfortunately, that one will be unfair too, and if he were to be acquitted, naturally there would be riots.
12 thoughts on “Derek Chauvin Has Appealed His Conviction, And If The Justice System Has Any Integrity, He Should Win”
… and if he were to be acquitted, naturally there would be riots.
I’d put you on the new jury!
I’m trying to figure out whether the prosecution would have me stricken for cause or have to us use a peremptory? And don’t litigators hate, hate, hate having lawyers in the jury room for fear they will hijack the jury? I know I’d sure as hell try to get a jury to find something less than murder.
I wonder if double jeopardy attaches to this prosecution. Let’s assume the appellate court vacates the conviction, can it dismiss the charges, too, based on denial of due process? I am not a criminal lawyer so I am not sure when an appellate court can reverse and render versus reverse and remand for a new trial.
Oh, and what about the allegations that Maxine Watters and her kind poisoned the jury deliberations by protesting and demanding a conviction? Does the wrongful death settlement on the eve of trial also have any bearing on the denial of due process?
I wrote back in March 2021, that…
I was clearly incorrect back then, but I still think that is what should happen if he wins his appeal.
It’s my opinion that there is no way that Chauvin can get an actual fair trial anywhere in the USA, and by fair I don’t mean that Chauvin has to be set free, I mean a trial by a jury of his peers that has not been unduly influenced one way or the other regarding anything about the trial, or the riots, or BLM, etc.
And what does Chauvin do if he does get out? He’s in the George Zimmerman land of most likely never being able to make any kind of living ever again. What a very bleak future.
If he gets a new trial, I would let the defense seat the Jury entirely and have the prosecution veto verifiably partisan individuals. I would do this because as a person who avoided all knowledge until I watched the video of the bystanders, I know he’ll get convicted again. You want to know why the Floyd protests were so exaggerated? Because even in a level headed person like me did that video leave a permanent impression and a bit of rage. Do I care about the BLM organization? No. Do I think this was racially motivated? Not particularly. Was this an abuse of power and disregard for human life? Absolutely.
Isn’t “disregard for human life” the definition of manslaughter?
Disregard for human life doesn’t equal a crime if it isn’t the cause of death beyond a reasonable doubt, which I believe an untainted jury could not have found.
Now, abuse of power gets him fired, and already did, though about ten years too late.
You’re correct on the entire list of reasons Chaivin didn’t get a fair trail. I just cannot imagine that a majority of the appealate judges have the courage to grant a new trial. Judges are not supposed to be politicians, but in this instance it would be nearly impossible not to be. Cancel culture is real, and the appealate judges would be. They would be ostracized from all social circles and they know it.
So ? Should that prevent them from doing the job they were sworn to do ? Chauvin was railroaded and does not deserve to be in prison and neither do the officers that were with him when Floyd died of a fentanyl overdose while in police custody.