Here's the thing. They're going to say that no matter what Floyd did, he didn't deserve to die.
Fortunately that kind of intellectually/logically bankrupt nonsense will never be tolerated in the courtroom (except maybe in a witness impact statement which means nothing).
The jury will understand that it was never a question of "deservingness". Chauvin wasn't carrying out a sentence as a punishment for a crime, he was trying to arrest Floyd. Even if Floyd did deserve to die, that still wouldn't authorize Chauvin to kill him because Chauvin is not an executioner. His job is to make arrests. Floyd died in the process of one of these arrests, and it's a question of who's fault that was, not whether Floyd "deserved" to die. Whether Floyd did or did not deserve to die is completely immaterial, since nobody's allowed to just unilaterally kill people who deserve to die anyway.
Depends how fearful the jury is. This is Minnesota, the only state that didn't vote for Reagan in 1984, the state with too much Swedish heritage for their own good, the state that sent brother-lover Illhan Omar to our Congress, the state with Ellison, one of the most evil DAs who definitely will leak jury information if they go not guilty.
If I was on that jury, I would fight for not guilty, but I'd also be buying a house in the South to send my stuff to before the trial was over, then to move immediately after, literally have a suitcase in the car and book it from the court house.
The jury already knows he died. That's not in question. All the defense needs to do is cast reasonable doubt about the assertion that it was mainly Chauvin's fault in the minds of a couple of jurors. And the facts are 100% on the defense's side. And the defense's case is already falling apart. It's so bad they've got star witnesses bailing on them.
Fortunately that kind of intellectually/logically bankrupt nonsense will never be tolerated in the courtroom (except maybe in a witness impact statement which means nothing).
The jury will understand that it was never a question of "deservingness". Chauvin wasn't carrying out a sentence as a punishment for a crime, he was trying to arrest Floyd. Even if Floyd did deserve to die, that still wouldn't authorize Chauvin to kill him because Chauvin is not an executioner. His job is to make arrests. Floyd died in the process of one of these arrests, and it's a question of who's fault that was, not whether Floyd "deserved" to die. Whether Floyd did or did not deserve to die is completely immaterial, since nobody's allowed to just unilaterally kill people who deserve to die anyway.
Depends how fearful the jury is. This is Minnesota, the only state that didn't vote for Reagan in 1984, the state with too much Swedish heritage for their own good, the state that sent brother-lover Illhan Omar to our Congress, the state with Ellison, one of the most evil DAs who definitely will leak jury information if they go not guilty.
If I was on that jury, I would fight for not guilty, but I'd also be buying a house in the South to send my stuff to before the trial was over, then to move immediately after, literally have a suitcase in the car and book it from the court house.
The jury already knows he died. That's not in question. All the defense needs to do is cast reasonable doubt about the assertion that it was mainly Chauvin's fault in the minds of a couple of jurors. And the facts are 100% on the defense's side. And the defense's case is already falling apart. It's so bad they've got star witnesses bailing on them.
Yeah, there will be.