George Floyd death / Derek Chauvin trial - Sidebar week 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #361
I don’t mean to be repetitive, but can someone please tell me what DC’s charges are? Please. Not what they were. Exactly what the jury will see and have to decide on. If that’s even available. TIA!
 
  • #362
Talk about reasonable doubt...how about today when Blackwell asks Fowler if he knew whether the engine was even on during the carbon dioxide cross. Not many lighter moments in this trial...judge really keeps it all business so I appreciate an occasional laugh which I had as I heard that.
 
  • #363
<modsnip: Quoted post was removed>

There is still a stigma associated with people who have mental health problems or substance abuse problems. I think it plays a role in how police treated Floyd during his arrest and why they ignored the bystanders who were obviously in distress. They even said, "this is what happens when you do drugs."

In the video of his previous arrest, police mocked him for crying and told him to "act like a man."
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #364
There is still a stigma associated with people who have mental health problems or substance abuse problems. I think it plays a role in how police treated Floyd during his arrest and why they ignored the bystanders who were obviously in distress. They even said, "this is what happens when you do drugs."

In the video of his previous arrest, police mocked him for crying and told him to "act like a man."
And that is where training comes in. That officer repeatedly punching a woman in the face and head could easily have killed her. He seems to have such rage and I don't believe it was just because she was behaving erratically. Something else going on there.
 
  • #365
  • #366
Talk about reasonable doubt...how about today when Blackwell asks Fowler if he knew whether the engine was even on during the carbon dioxide cross. Not many lighter moments in this trial...judge really keeps it all business so I appreciate an occasional laugh which I had as I heard that.

Yeah, it was humorous, but Dr. Fowler did know. What I thought was really funny was Dr. F's explanation for why DC didn't get CO poisoning. He was also by the pipe. I think Dr. F said because he was a couple feet back. So isn't that room enough to put GF in recovery? The way I see it, even if GF could have died from CO, DC is the one that held GF under the tailpipe. So what's the point?

"Reasonable doubt" is really critical. There's a man's life at stake, but there's also a man who lost his life. Neither can be taken likely, and so we have to get it right. It's part of the process to eliminate unreasonable doubt for GF's sake and to find reasonable doubt, if any, for DC's sake. That's what we should be doing, not holding onto any doubts we might have or any unreasonable reasons to convict that we might have.
 
  • #367
I don’t mean to be repetitive, but can someone please tell me what DC’s charges are? Please. Not what they were. Exactly what the jury will see and have to decide on. If that’s even available. TIA!


This is from the online court records for this case. I attached a PDF and the link as well.

Case #: 27-CR-20-12646
1. Murder - 2nd Degree - Without Intent - While Committing a Felony (Not applicable - GOC) 609.19.2(1)

2. Murder - 3rd Degree - Perpetrating Eminently Dangerous Act and Evincing Depraved Mind (Not applicable - GOC) 609.195(a)

3. Manslaughter - 2nd Degree - Culpable Negligence Creating Unreasonable Risk (Not applicable - GOC) 609.205(1)

https://pa.courts.state.mn.us/default.aspx
 

Attachments

Last edited:
  • #368
I don’t mean to be repetitive, but can someone please tell me what DC’s charges are? Please. Not what they were. Exactly what the jury will see and have to decide on. If that’s even available. TIA!

is this what you are looking for? They explain the charges as they will be given to the jury I think. Ultimately, the Judge decides or they come to an agreement on the final instructions, not sure how that will be done.

defense proposed jury instructions:
https://mncourts.gov/mncourtsgov/me...20-12646/ProposedJuryInstructions02082021.pdf

State proposed jury instructions:
https://www.mncourts.gov/mncourtsgo...646/StateProposedJuryInstructions02082021.pdf
 
  • #369
I agree. The defense is blaming the crowd and blaming Floyd for his drug habit and his health problems, all things that a police officer should already be taking into account when arresting and restraining someone. The defense seems to be blaming late EMS, too, even though DC didn't think it was necessary to roll GF into recovery, get his knee off GF's neck, or do chest compressions when they lost the pulse for an additional 2 or 3 minutes. Not giving him that aid ensured he would die, imo.

That's regardless of what drugs were or were not undigested/absorbed in his stomach. If DC had taken his knee off, had rolled GF to the side or done chest compressions (or let someone do them), and GF still died -- I don't know if his behavior would meet the criteria of the charges.
Yes, it's the drugs fault, it's Floyd's heart's fault, it's the crowd's fault and now the carbon monoxides fault. Everything else but what the officers did.
 
  • #370
Was GF chewing gum?

I think they might have to call SH back and ask her. Or the clerks in the store. They might know. If GF had gum in his mouth, it's hard to believe he had pills in his mouth, too. I know there was a pill in the squad, but we do also see this white wad in his mouth that is bigger than a pill, and it's highly unlikely that he was sucking on a pill, flipping it around in his mouth for that length of time or that the pill might even last that long. Maybe, but that pill was smaller than the thing in his mouth in the latest pictures.

I chew gum all the time because I stopped smoking. I don't really chew it as much as I let it sit in my mouth between my back teeth. So maybe he could have had a pill under his tongue, trying to absorb it that way while gum was sitting in his mouth, but that's a lot going on with his mouth. Plus all the talking he was doing.

I don't know what to make of all that testimony. Thoughts?
 
  • #371
Thank you @wasnt_me @Tippy Lynn and @missy1974 !!

@Boodles you respectfully asked what I doubted and I’m not great with words. I did my best to highlight in red what exactly for each charge I had doubts about. Hope this helps!
609.19 MURDER IN THE SECOND DEGREE. Subdivision 1.Intentional murder; drive-by shootings.

Whoever does either of the following is guilty of murder in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 40 years:

(1) causes the death of a human being with intent to effect the death of that person or another, but without premeditation; or

(2) causes the death of a human being while committing or attempting to commit a drive-by shooting in violation of section 609.66, subdivision 1e, under circumstances other than those described in section 609.185, paragraph (a), clause (3).

Subd. 2.Unintentional murders.

Whoever does either of the following is guilty of unintentional murder in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 40 years:

(1) causes the death of a human being, without intent to effect the death of any person, while committing or attempting to commit a felony offense other than criminal sexual conduct in the first or second degree with force or violence or a drive-by shooting; or

(2) causes the death of a human being without intent to effect the death of any person, while intentionally inflicting or attempting to inflict bodily harm upon the victim, when the perpetrator is restrained under an order for protection and the victim is a person designated to receive protection under the order. As used in this clause, "order for protection" includes an order for protection issued under chapter 518B; a harassment restraining order issued under section 609.748; a court order setting conditions of pretrial release or conditions of a criminal sentence or juvenile court disposition; a restraining order issued in a marriage dissolution action; and any order issued by a court of another state or of the United States that is similar to any of these orders.

609.195 MURDER IN THE THIRD DEGREE.
(a) Whoever, without intent to effect the death of any person, causes the death of another by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life, is guilty of murder in the third degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 25 years.

(b) Whoever, without intent to cause death, proximately causes the death of a human being by, directly or indirectly, unlawfully selling, giving away, bartering, delivering, exchanging, distributing, or administering a controlled substance classified in Schedule I or II, is guilty of murder in the third degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 25 years or to payment of a fine of not more than $40,000, or both.

609.205 MANSLAUGHTER IN THE SECOND DEGREE.
A person who causes the death of another by any of the following means is guilty of manslaughter in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than ten years or to payment of a fine of not more than $20,000, or both:

(1) by the person's culpable negligence whereby the person creates an unreasonable risk, and consciously takes chances of causing death or great bodily harm to another; or

(2) by shooting another with a firearm or other dangerous weapon as a result of negligently believing the other to be a deer or other animal; or

(3) by setting a spring gun, pit fall, deadfall, snare, or other like dangerous weapon or device; or

(4) by negligently or intentionally permitting any animal, known by the person to have vicious propensities or to have caused great or substantial bodily harm in the past, to run uncontrolled off the owner's premises, or negligently failing to keep it properly confined; or

(5) by committing or attempting to commit a violation of section 609.378 (neglect or endangerment of a child), and murder in the first, second, or third degree is not committed thereby.

If proven by a preponderance of the evidence, it shall be an affirmative defense to criminal liability under clause (4) that the victim provoked the animal to cause the victim's death.
 
  • #372
DBM, was already answered. The statutes may not be as clear as the jury instructions which we will see before closing/deliberations next week. When they get finalized by the court. MOO

For one of the charges, it appears to need to have an associated felony.... it has been mentioned that includes 3rd degree felony assault per articles.

BRB as there is an article to read on such
 
Last edited:
  • #373
What EXACTLY the jury will see has not been finalized yet. Above you have the statutes and the potential submissions by just the prosecution. We'll see the jury charges later when approved prior to closings/deliberations.
Good to know, I appreciate it!
 
  • #374
  • #375
  • #376
  • #377
  • #378
  • #379
squeezing in between MadMcGoo and Tippy Lynn, to sit on the bench. :p

Oh no - I need to come up with an excuse. I don't envy the jurors one bit. :eek:
 
  • #380
Oh no - I need to come up with an excuse. I don't envy the jurors one bit. :eek:
Nor do I. I trust they’ll do what’s being asked of them and take this very seriously.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
72
Guests online
1,329
Total visitors
1,401

Forum statistics

Threads
632,380
Messages
18,625,469
Members
243,125
Latest member
JosBay
Back
Top