Derek Chauvin murder trial (Police officer who arrested George Floyd)

Status
Not open for further replies.
MookJong said:
I was asking about how Chauvin is guilty of both murder and manslaughter? I don't remember ever seeing this happen before and to my mind one rules out the other. Does anyone know if this would also be possible under UK law or if this is somewhat a quirk of the US rules?
Click to expand...

It seems it was 2nd and 3rd degree murder, which are causing murder unintentionally. The 3rd degree murder charge seems to be only applicable in a few states. The 2nd degree manslaughter seems to be the same thing.

I think we here would just call it all manslaughter.

I think its right he was found guilty.
 
BowdonUK said:
It seems it was 2nd and 3rd degree murder, which are causing murder unintentionally. The 3rd degree murder charge seems to be only applicable in a few states. The 2nd degree manslaughter seems to be the same thing.

I think we here would just call it all manslaughter.

I think its right he was found guilty.
Click to expand...

Disclaimer: quoting to expand on what you said not to disagree.

Having a look at it there fact the cop was guilty of 2 types of murders and manslaughter is a bit odd from a UK perspective, but I had a quick look at the US explanations. I used CNN which is obviously biaised as all American news is, but the factual explanation should be just that. How they've explained the differences:

The three charges each interpret Chauvin's intent last May in a slightly different way.

The second-degree unintentional murder charge is what's known as felony murder, or when a person commits an underlying felony and someone unintentionally dies. This charge required the jury to find that Chauvin intended to assault Floyd and inflict substantial bodily harm.

The third-degree murder charge alleged that Chauvin had a "depraved mind, without regard for human life." The basic gist of depraved mind is "extreme recklessness," according to Richard Frase, Professor of Criminal Law at University of Minnesota Law School.

The charge is generally used in cases where a person drives a vehicle the wrong way or fires a weapon into a crowd. This murder charge was dismissed by the judge last year but reinstated in March after an appeals case involving the murder conviction of former Minneapolis Police officer Mohamed Noor.

Finally, the second-degree manslaughter charge relies on "culpable negligence," which has been interpreted to mean gross negligence combined with recklessness.
Click to expand...

Not a UK lawyer, but I would think from a UK perspective that would all end up pretty much as manslaughter, which is probably the correct outcome.
 
I was a bit surprised at the verdict having seen some of the defence evidence in this thread (I was expecting manslaughter), but then I guess using the actual definitions of the murder charges it doesn't seem as out-there as it initially sounds.

Personally I wonder whether Derek's refusal to give evidence was a mistake for him. I know it's his 'right' and jurors aren't meant to hold it against him, but I would naturally give someone less benefit of the doubt if they didn't feel like they could give their own account of things and answer questions without risking incriminating themselves. What was going through his head between George apparently going unconscious and the ambulance arriving seems to be key bit of information to me, but Derek never actually explained this himself.
 
Pudney said:
Not a UK lawyer, but I would think from a UK perspective that would all end up pretty much as manslaughter, which is probably the correct outcome.
Click to expand...

Manslaughter is the only charge he was guilty of
Third-degree is pushing it given the health condition of GF and the amount of drugs in his system
Second-degree is just silly.

The appeal should be interesting.
 
Just read this about Minneapolis police.

"Police Department Finance Director Robin McPherson said to her knowledge none of the officers who went on leave last year have returned to duty."

That's very bad for the law abiding people.
 
VincentHanna said:
Some people will say no.

But that's why the cops were called.
Click to expand...
Not even that is honest.

The cops were called because, aside from the fake bill, the store clerk thought Floyd "had little control over his own body" and was on something. Either drunk or high, and also passed a fake bill.
 
FoxEye said:
Not even that is honest.

The cops were called because, aside from the fake bill, the store clerk thought Floyd "had little control over his own body" and was on something. Either drunk or high, and also passed a fake bill.
Click to expand...

You think being drunk or high is a criminal offence? Blimey I must be breaking the law all the time when I drink.

The crime they were called out for was passing a fake bill
 
deuse said:
Just read this about Minneapolis police.

"Police Department Finance Director Robin McPherson said to her knowledge none of the officers who went on leave last year have returned to duty."

That's very bad for the law abiding people.
Click to expand...

It's fine, they can just defend themselves with their 2nd Amendment.
 
I think someone summed it up earlier in the thread when they said: 'all you need to do is watch the video, the rest is just noise'.

Reading up on the second degree murder charge in Minnesota, it seems absolutely the correct decision. There's absolutely no police training that would allow kneeling on a suspect they way DC did for that amount of time, after clearly being made aware that George Floyd was struggling to breathe.
 
VincentHanna said:
You think being drunk or high is a criminal offence? Blimey I must be breaking the law all the time when I drink.

The crime they were called out for was passing a fake bill
Click to expand...
You're choosing to ignore what the clerk actually said. Which is that he called the cops because Floyd passed a fake bill and looked like he was high on something (or drunk).

You're picking and choosing to suit your own narrative.

Also Floyd was behind the wheel of his car. Whilst high or drunk. And had told his ex GF he was going to give her a lift.

The question was, "Was this all over a $20 bill?" Clearly not. The whole story is about so much more than that.
 
pallys said:
Another lie unfortunately, he said it while compressed on the floor, it's on video evidence.
Click to expand...

Wrong.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1218556

George Floyd told police he was struggling to breathe before an officer put a knee on his neck
Click to expand...

Floyd initially cooperated but then "actively resisted being handcuffed," the complaint said. But once "handcuffed, Mr. Floyd became compliant," according to prosecutors.
Floyd did not want to get into a squad car, as he "stiffened up, fell to the ground, and told the officers he was claustrophobic," the complaint said, as Minneapolis police officer Tou Thoa and Chauvin arrived in their car.
Ad
"While standing outside the car, Mr. Floyd began saying and repeating that he could not breathe," the document said.
Click to expand...
 
Moley said:
So it appears there are potentially four grounds for appeal - some clearly stronger than others.

  1. Judges failure to move the trial
  2. Judges failure to sequester the jury
  3. Interference by Maxine Walters (and others) - which makes point 2 stronger
  4. The $27m payout by the city five days before jury selection.
A lot of people are saying that these four things made it almost impossible for him to get a fair trial.

There will be an appeal and I predict that at the very least Chauvins sentence will be drastically reduced, possible even some of the convictions vacated or a mistrial declared.

This ain't over folks....
Click to expand...

I was chatting with a friend in the US who is legally connected, and says theres an issue over what the judge instructed the jury in terms of Felony assault (which is needed for the 2nd murder).

Also grounds for ineffective council as his lawyer didnt object enough apparently, particularly when it came to some of the witness testimonies.
 
kindai said:
Also grounds for ineffective council as his lawyer didnt object enough apparently, particularly when it came to some of the witness testimonies.
Click to expand...
Never going to stick. Nelson (and as a result Chauvin) was backed up by a team of 11 other attorneys in the MPPOA and no doubt staff and legal professionals in Nelson's own firm.
 
iamtheoneneo said:
Never going to stick. Nelson (and as a result Chauvin) was backed up by a team of 11 other attorneys in the MPPOA and no doubt staff and legal professionals in Nelson's own firm.
Click to expand...

And what does the number of attorneys have to do with the number of objections raised?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom