George Floyd death / Derek Chauvin trial - Sidebar week 3

[bluebird69]

I'm glad the jury is not hearing this. Sundeep lyer sounds like the least jury friendly lawyer I've heard. It's not surprising he's been kept in the back room in an advisory capacity. I'm suspecting most of his recommendations will not be included in the jury instructions.

I did wonder who this was, rather a robotic voice, so couldnt really take in what was being said. Wonder why he is not also in the courtroom..

 

[JerseyGirl]

Attorney Sundeep Iyer is currently presenting the state’s argument on jury instructions via a phone call.

Iyer offers an alternative definition pulled from a recent MN Supreme Court ruling. “Reckless disregard for human life means that the defendant was indifferent to the loss of life that an eminently dangerous act by the defendant could cause”

Iyer asks the court to delete the phrase “May not have been specifically directed at the particular person whose death occurred” or if not, to change “may not” to “Need.”

This is related to 3rd degree murder instructions.

https://twitter.com/anavilastra/status/1382792023615410176?s=21

 

[bluebird69]

DC Police to activate full department ahead of verdict in Derek Chauvin trial
The department is requiring all officers to work 12-hour shifts and canceling time off ahead of possible protests.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wu...atter/65-5a2f0c95-adf4-4a29-aeb6-789f5c132ed8
DC Police fully activating ahead of Derek Chauvin trial verdict | wusa9.com

Ha Good luck with that

 

[Tom_Servo]

I did wonder who this was, rather a robotic voice, so couldnt really take in what was being said. Wonder why he is not also in the courtroom..

I think you heard why he isn't in the courtroom. Based on how and what he was saying his courtroom presence would likely not go over very well.

 

[JerseyGirl]

Matthew Frank is following up now on instructions on the 2019 incident…

https://twitter.com/anavilastra/status/1382792327228448769?s=21

Frank: You know we did oppose the instruction about the invocation of the Fifth Amendment, privilege, just so that's on the record.

Nelson: ...the last paragraph that states whether the officers own conduct during the incident unreasonably created the need to use such force, and we had objected to that.

Judge Cahill says he’ll have a draft to the attorneys tomorrow morning. He tells them they won’t argue the substance of the instructions, but he will address typos.

Back in court Monday 9 a.m.

https://twitter.com/anavilastra/status/1382793698900123658?s=21

 

[wasnt_me]

And could lead to an elite class of jurors. No, we don't want that. Part of our culture is a jury of peers.

jmo

Yes, that's true, too, and I think a professional pool of jurors would also get to know lawyers and judges, and lawyers would get to know those jurors and how they vote. There could be tainting or sway there, too.

 

[bluebird69]

I think you heard why he isn't in the courtroom. Based on how and what he was saying his courtroom presence would likely not go over very well.

True I was just meaning for this last bit,not for the jurors, as I see the AG appeared to be there. Agree with your comments though

 

[Algo214]

From my Lawyer's perspective, listening back to the Charge Conference: hearings about Law only are such a bore

 

[magnolia]

I agree, he mostly has appeared as an easy going type, and the little touches like holding doors open for witnesses, touching DC on the arm when introducing him to jurors etc. He has my respect and I hope he is safe

I have the utmost respect for Eric Nelson. He handled himself very well considering he was so outnumbered.

There was just something about him. He seemed to so down to earth. The most likeable Attorney in the court-room. IMO

 

[sds71]

Minnesota law enforcement officers are given the option to pay into a Legal Defense Fund run through the Minnesota Police and Peace Officers Association. The fund retains and pays for 12 criminal defense attorneys, who represent police officers charged with crimes related to their work.

MPPOA said it assigns the attorneys on a rotating basis. The organization would not answer specific questions about Chauvin's case.

Mary Moriarty, the former chief public defender in Hennepin County, said it is common for public defenders to try cases on their own, but says in the Chauvin trial, it could be a strategy the defense is intentionally using.

"I think the perception that Eric Nelson is trying to create with the jury is one of the underdog," she said. "It may well be a strategy in this case ... that you are there by yourself against the vast forces of the government."

Daly, who has been following the trial closely, said he thinks Nelson has been doing his best, given the circumstances.

"I think he's very calm, cool and collected," Daly said. "He pays close attention. He looks right at the person that he's asking his questions of. He's done all the work necessary to put this case together."

Single attorney leading Chauvin's defense differs from previous police cases

 

[kittythehare]

Minnesota law enforcement officers are given the option to pay into a Legal Defense Fund run through the Minnesota Police and Peace Officers Association. The fund retains and pays for 12 criminal defense attorneys, who represent police officers charged with crimes related to their work.

MPPOA said it assigns the attorneys on a rotating basis. The organization would not answer specific questions about Chauvin's case.

Mary Moriarty, the former chief public defender in Hennepin County, said it is common for public defenders to try cases on their own, but says in the Chauvin trial, it could be a strategy the defense is intentionally using.

"I think the perception that Eric Nelson is trying to create with the jury is one of the underdog," she said. "It may well be a strategy in this case ... that you are there by yourself against the vast forces of the government."

Daly, who has been following the trial closely, said he thinks Nelson has been doing his best, given the circumstances.

"I think he's very calm, cool and collected," Daly said. "He pays close attention. He looks right at the person that he's asking his questions of. He's done all the work necessary to put this case together."

Single attorney leading Chauvin's defense differs from previous police cases

She also said she would not have him testify f she was his attorney
https://twitter.com/RuhleOnMSNBC/status/1382684503450267649?s=20

 

[Boodles]

Can I ask where you saw the judge holding his head in his hands please? I was watching WaPo and didn't see that although I am not totally surprised TIA

It was during the sidebar just after Blackwell started questioning Dr. Tobin.

 

[bluebird69]

It was during the sidebar just after Blackwell started questioning Dr. Tobin.

Oh thanks I'm off to have another search for it

 

[Inthedetails]

Heres another tidbit. Our segment is in a specific sport realm and our off topic/political board is pretty right leaning. We're different in that it's loosely moderated but not a free for all. If it doesn't involve minors, personal threats or copyright we let it go.

When the original video was released the overwhelming opinion was against Chauvin. After the full video was released (couple months ago?) the opinion changed a little. It went from "throw him under the jail" to "maybe this is not as bad as we thought".

One of the reasons I've lurked here is the community. This is a much more informed group even though we're larger. I've got a bunch of uniformed sports fans vs a group of well informed and heavily invested users. Not saying their opinion isn't important but relevance is lost when you express uninformed opinions.

Stick around. Most of us found WS because of one case in particular....and never left.

jmo

 

[In vino veritas]

Do you believe the Jurors should consider what the city has already gone through when deciding the fate of Chauvin ??

Absolutely not. The case should be decided on facts and charged according to the instructions given to the jurors.
Would be a dangerous precedent to set. It is up to the city to ensure citizens behave appropriately , not the jury.

IMHO, AG Barr should have let DC accept the plea deal for 3rd degree murder.

 

[SouthAussie]

"I will invoke my Fifth Amendment privilege today," Chauvin told the court Thursday morning.

Nelson reminded Chauvin that "the state would have broad latitude" to cross-examine him as a witness if he testified. Nelson and Chauvin told the court they had "repeatedly" discussed whether to testify.

"We have gone back and forth on the matter would be kind of an understatement, right?" Nelson asked Chauvin.

"Yes it is," Chauvin said with a small hint of a smile.

Nelson asked Chauvin if they had a "lengthy" meeting Wednesday night about testifying that led to "further discussion."

"Correct," Chauvin said, adding that he would not testify.

"The decision whether or not to testify is entirely yours," Cahill told Chauvin after his discussion with Nelson. "In other words, it's a personal right … Is this your decision not to testify?"

"It is, your honor," Chauvin said.

The judge asked if he had any questions. He said no. The judge asked if anyone had made promises or threats to influence his decision.

"No promises or threats, your honor," Chauvin said.

Cahill asked Chauvin if he wanted jurors to receive a special instruction on the issue, which is offered by the courts when defendants choose not to testify. Chauvin said yes.

"The state must convince you by evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty of the crime charged," according to the instruction Cahill recited Thursday. "The defendant has no obligation to prove innocence. The defendant has the right not to testify. This right is guaranteed by the federal and state constitutions. You should not draw any inference from the fact the defendant has not testified in this case."

Chauvin defense rests its case without his testimony - StarTribune.com

 

[MadMcGoo]

I missed most of today’s testimony and I wanted to clarify a few things, which prompted me to go back and watch the body cam footage again. I had been wondering about the spontaneous leg movement that experts testified occurred as a result of a seizure GF had (I can’t recall the exact name). I wanted to see if it were different from the initial “kick” I saw when he was being placed on the ground and it was. My question, and I don’t remember the defense bringing this up, was how would a non medical professional be able to distinguish that from an act of resistance? I couldn’t.

I guess maybe because I’ve been in many, many situations very similar to this, I see something different than most people when I watch these videos. GF was actively, and at times violently, resisting for most of this interaction. I feel like the UOF was justified. When experts testified to GF’s movements being efforts to breathe, I see more that he’s continuing to resist and tiring himself out in the process. All the way up to when the officer said “roll him onto his side”. I’m not sure I would have rolled him at that point either. From my perspective, he was still resisting. I had to go back and listen a few times when the officer did check his pulse to see what he said. I couldn’t hear over the radio traffic. I don’t know what would have been heard in person by different people.

At times when the crowd is yelling at these officers and some are responding, I can’t tell who’s talking to who and often times what everyone is saying. Especially the first time I watched it, which I feel could be similar to what each person would have experienced in that moment (I’m sure it was a little different in person). Meaning, they didn’t have the opportunity to rewind and listen to things again like we do. This goes back to that phenomenon I spoke of earlier (I’ve already forgotten the name). Basically, one would be able to hear people talking around you, but not necessarily hear specifically what anyone was saying at times.

I can see how people yelling what to do, even the off duty FF, would be distracting. Some would say it shouldn’t be and I agree to an extent. Attention was divided even though it shouldn’t have been. You’ve got an angry crowd of people yelling, I’d wonder if one had a gun (for example). Now you’ve got an actively resisting subject and the unpredictable crowd, along with other things. Where does one focus? Yes, there’s an officer “handling” the crowd and a couple more there with you. But in your mind, do you just stop worrying about all but one thing? A reasonable person might say YES, but could you? Reasonably? One might say, ‘well at least one officer said to roll him over’. Yes, but was he aware of what crowds like this are capable of? He hasn’t been on the job long, so maybe he has no clue they can turn on a dime. They seem innocent enough. So his attention is somewhere different than where others’ may be.

All these things would be going through my mind during this. And before you know it 9 minutes and 29 seconds has passed. The ambulance is there. Seems like in the blink of an eye. I’m sure that felt like an eternity to Mr. Floyd. Or maybe it didn’t. We can’t know.

Every time I watch the video in its entirety the things I would have done differently in that situation become fewer and fewer. At this point I honestly don’t know what one thing caused the death of GF. (ETA: Or played the greatest role) When I first heard about this case I thought I did. But now I just don’t know.

These are concerns/feelings I would bring up if I were on the jury. Am I wrong? I really don’t know. I’m glad this is a safe place that I feel comfortable enough sharing and having a civil discussion. Thanks!

 

[SouthAussie]

Arthur Reed, one of Floyd's cousins, watched the proceeding from the lone seat in the courtroom designated for a Floyd family representative.

Asked outside the courtroom about Chauvin's decision not to testify, Reed said he believed the prosecution "would have chopped him down second by second" were he asked why he remained on Floyd for more than nine minutes.

"We didn't think they were going to put him on at all," Reed said. "We're just ready to get this over with, make sure [Floyd] gets the justice he deserves. We think the state has put on an excellent case."

A woman sat in a seat Thursday reserved for Chauvin's supporters. She declined to identify herself to a reporter.

https://www.startribune.com/chauvin-defense-rests-its-case-without-his-testimony/600046458/

 

[SouthAussie]

<RSBM>
Every time I watch the video in its entirety the things I would have done differently in that situation become fewer and fewer. At this point I honestly don’t know what one caused the death of GF. When I first heard about this case I thought I did. But now I just don’t know.

I think the one thing we (likely) all can agree on is that we would have removed our knee from George's neck and rolled him into the recovery position - at the very least. George was not resisting. In fact, George fell unconscious.

This is the the hugest thing in this case. imo

 

[MadMcGoo]

I think the one thing we (likely) all can agree on is that we would have removed our knee from George's neck and rolled him into the recovery position - at the very least. George was not resisting. In fact, George fell unconscious.

This is the the hugest thing in this case. imo

Obviously now we can say we definitely would have. But would we have? That I don’t know.