George Floyd death / Derek Chauvin trial - Sidebar week 3

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mony Mony

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2013
Messages
1,580
Reaction score
5,900
Can I ask where the doubt is? is it the cause of death? the use of force being reasonable? both? I'm just curious and you don't have to answer if you don't want to.

I'm not sure where I would fall within all the charges, was hoping we would get jury instructions to see if I could work through them and see.

I'm leaning towards manslaughter at the moment, but I am not sure that the charges 'allow' it for my thinking at the moment.

i have reasonable doubt as to the cause of the death. Plus, the EMS call was escalated, regardless of the reason why. It was still escalated and there appears to be some type of delay in their arrival.

My doubt as to the cause is death is mainly due to GF saying he can’t breathe right at the onset. And his exgirlfriend said he was nodding off in the car for some (drug related?) reason.
 

missy1974

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2008
Messages
10,142
Reaction score
31,354
I don't believe he intended to cause any permanent harm to GF but I do think GF wouldn't have died if not for Chauvin's actions and inaction as far as not giving aid. Whatever actually caused GF death (be it heart attack, overdose, neck compression or a combination) IMO if not for Chauvin he probably would have lived.

So I have no clue what I would find hime guilty of.

I'm still trying to figure out if his inactions are enough for even manslaughter. Meaning... if I'm unsure of the cause of his death, or even if the force was allowable or not, Chauvin/other officers not providing cpr in what can be deemed a 'reasonable' amount of time is enough to find him guilty of something.

I found this paper that was written sometime in 2020 the other night. It talks mainly about shooting victims, but it's about the responsibility of LE in providing medical aid. It's interesting.

https://kb.osu.edu/bitstream/handle/1811/92251/1/OSJCL_V18N1_391.pdf

Although the Supreme Court has held that suspects who suffer an injury during arrest should receive “the needed medical treatment,”47 the Court has so far not defined what constitutes treatment and who is obligated to provide it. The Court has also refused to consider the issue of whether an officer violates the Constitution by failing to provide first aid to an individual whom they have shot.48 Several lower courts, however, have considered the issue and have typically resolved the issue in favor of the officers who failed to render any first aid after a police-involved shooting
 

missy1974

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2008
Messages
10,142
Reaction score
31,354
i have reasonable doubt as to the cause of the death. Plus, the EMS call was escalated, regardless of the reason why. It was still escalated and there appears to be some type of delay in their arrival.

My doubt as to the cause is death is mainly due to GF saying he can’t breathe right at the onset. And his exgirlfriend said he was nodding off in the car for some (drug related?) reason.

The delay was never really explained, was it? In my notes, I have this:
code 2 at 8:20:11
code 3 at 8:21:35
ems arrival 8:28:36

Then fire was given the wrong address to find where the ems unit went to, so there was a further delay.

ETA: and thanks for answering!
 

SouthAussie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2012
Messages
25,537
Reaction score
136,740
The delay was never really explained, was it? In my notes, I have this:
code 2 at 8:20:11
code 3 at 8:21:35
ems arrival 8:28:36

Then fire was given the wrong address to find where the ems unit went to, so there was a further delay.

ETA: and thanks for answering!

How soon would others have expected the ambulance to arrive? The code 3 was issued when it was already on its way. Meaning that they headed to the scene within at least 1min 24secs of receiving the code 2 alert. Probably just enough time to hurriedly gather themselves and hop in the ambulance.


While paramedics were on their way to the scene, the call was upgraded to Code 3, allowing the driver to rush to the scene with lights and sirens blaring.
Paramedic Says George Floyd Was Unresponsive When They Arrived At The Scene | KFI AM 640
 

jjs

Waiting for justice...
Joined
Sep 9, 2016
Messages
83
Reaction score
697
I think perhaps that intent is going to be one of the big issues. As guilty as I think he is, even I don't believe that DC set out that day to kill George Floyd. I don't think he woke up and said "I'm gonna go kill a dude today." Especially since it seems like his career was really the only thing he had going on in his life. From everything I've read, his wife seemed to live almost a separate life. Being a cop *was* his life- even after hours. Why would he purposely jeopardize that?

I wonder why the state didn't bring in the prior case that they fought to bring in, or the owner of the club who said he was overly aggressive, especially on nights where the clientele was mostly Black. Depending on the jury instruction, I could possibly have a problem with intent.

TL should have cut a deal and testified against DC. He is the only one I feel bad for. His first day, and there is proof that he tried to do what was right, but was overruled by a FTO.

Editing just to say, I'm trying to look at this from all possible angles. I don't envy the jurors.
 

SouthAussie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2012
Messages
25,537
Reaction score
136,740
I think perhaps that intent is going to be one of the big issues. As guilty as I think he is, even I don't believe that DC set out that day to kill George Floyd. I don't think he woke up and said "I'm gonna go kill a dude today." Especially since it seems like his career was really the only thing he had going on in his life. From everything I've read, his wife seemed to live almost a separate life. Being a cop *was* his life- even after hours. Why would he purposely jeopardize that?

I wonder why the state didn't bring in the prior case that they fought to bring in, or the owner of the club who said he was overly aggressive, especially on nights where the clientele was mostly Black. Depending on the jury instruction, I could possibly have a problem with intent.

I am not sure that intent has to be an issue.

Second degree unintentional murder is one of the charges.

Third degree murder states ... "without intent to effect the death of any person"

And the only intent mentioned in the second degree manslaughter description is if someone intentionally allows an animal with vicious propensities to run off their property or doesn't keep them contained.

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.19
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.195
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.205
 
Last edited:

jjs

Waiting for justice...
Joined
Sep 9, 2016
Messages
83
Reaction score
697
I am not sure that intent has to be an issue.

Second degree unintentional murder is one of the charges.

I know, I'm just trying to look at it from all angles. The jury instructions are confusing. And even though it is listed as unintentional, I think it still might be a question some of the jurors may have. (and if I were one of them, I would be unwavering in my vote for 2nd degree).
 

MsBetsy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2018
Messages
18,850
Reaction score
165,584
The 2019 incident went smoothly because Mr. Floyd didn't resist. He didn't fight getting in the back seat of the squad car. IMO

As stated, the officers were very loud and vocal. They yelled at him to put his hands on the dash. They threatened to use a taser if he didn't cooperate and show his hands. I don't know how many times Mr. Floyd said, "man why you do me this way".

I'm curious why Mr. Floyd stopped mumbling when they arrived at the police station.
I can see where Nelson came up with the idea to make the jury think he said, "I ate too many drugs," since the officer said, "he's eatin all kinds a stuff," in this video.

From the way George was mumbling and slurring his words, he appeared to be more intoxicated that time than on the day he died. He seemed perfectly coherent that day. He was speaking clearly right up until he lost consciousness.

I don't know how many times he said "why you do me like that," but that's not nearly as important as the amount of times he said, "I can't breathe!"
 

SouthAussie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2012
Messages
25,537
Reaction score
136,740
I know, I'm just trying to look at it from all angles. The jury instructions are confusing. And even though it is listed as unintentional, I think it still might be a question some of the jurors may have. (and if I were one of them, I would be unwavering in my vote for 2nd degree).

Yes, it might be a question in their minds. But as intent is not a component of any of the charges (I edited my post to show all charges), intent is not allowed to be considered, I don't think.
 

MsBetsy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2018
Messages
18,850
Reaction score
165,584
The delay was never really explained, was it? In my notes, I have this:
code 2 at 8:20:11
code 3 at 8:21:35
ems arrival 8:28:36

Then fire was given the wrong address to find where the ems unit went to, so there was a further delay.

ETA: and thanks for answering!
I don't think the delay needed to be explained because it doesn't excuse the officer's actions. They could have started CPR as soon as Floyd stopped breathing.
 

Algo214

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2020
Messages
327
Reaction score
3,499
The EMS is a red herring here, it wasn't foreseeable for them that their arrival would be delayed.
If they gave them a wrong address it could make matters worse (not in this case but in general and if it had been brought up)

If I get shot, perpetrator flees the scene, someone finds me soon after, calls 911 but they don't get there in time to save me, I was still murdered by the person that escaped, not by the lack of emergency treatment.

Floyd's death is a consequence of an action which did not need to be intentional in any of the charges Chauvin faces
For 2nd degree manslaughter, Chauvin must have caused Floyd's death by his culpable negligence that created an unreasonable risk, consciously taking chances of causing death (MN 609.205 a)
For Murder in the 3rd degree, Chauvin must have caused Floyd's death by an eminently dangerous act evincing a depraved heart, without regard to human life (MN 609.195 a)
For Murder in the 2nd degree, Chauvin must have caused Floyd's death without intent to effect his death, while intentionally comitting a felony.
In this case, the felony is 3rd degree assault which is one that causes substantial bodily harm. The intent is attached to the action of making physical contact, without the other person's consent (MN 609.223 Subd. 1)

All my interpretation, btw. But from what I have read and heard from lawyers and my own experience I know I'm at least in the ballpark.
 
Last edited:

jjs

Waiting for justice...
Joined
Sep 9, 2016
Messages
83
Reaction score
697
Yes, it might be a question in their minds. But as intent is not a component of any of the charges (I edited my post to show all charges), intent is not allowed to be considered, I don't think.

No, I don't think it is. I still wonder though if it will be a question in the back of some jurors' minds. Like why? Why would he do this? Why did this happen? The only way I could see intent coming in in any way is in the manner of if he was acting reasonably. Reasonable to other officers? Obviously not. But reasonable to him?
I think why is a question we all have, and will never get an answer to. I've been trying to look at the case in all directions today, and it's just been running through my head this afternoon. Forgive my rambling today :)
 

al66pine

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2011
Messages
7,476
Reaction score
27,016
Bringing Up Plea Deal Negotiation?
Copying from previous thread, a post by MTW2011 "Anyone think Chauvin will testify? ...what if he did, would Nelson be able to ask something that elicits Derek to say he initially agreed to a plea deal with 3rd degree but DOJ wouldn't agree to that? THAT would cause quite a circus I imagine."
@MTW2011 sbm No longer a question re this defendant testifying, but if he had, appears per MN Rule of Evidence,* testimony re negotiations would be inadmissible. my2ct.
Welcoming comment, clarification, correction, esp. from our legal professionals.

"Rule 408. Compromise and Offers to Compromise
"Evidence of (1) furnishing or offering or promising to furnish, or (2) accepting or offering or promising to accept, a valuable consideration in compromising or attempting to compromise a claim which was disputed as to either validity or amount, is not admissible to prove liability for or invalidity of the claim or its amount. Evidence of conduct or statements made in compromise negotiations is likewise not admissible..." bbm sbm

The rationale underlying rule is explained in "Committee Comment - 1977"

" ...affording more protection to compromise discussions that presently exist. The increased protection is justified to the extent that it will encourage frank and free discussion to compromise negotiations and avoid the necessity for parties to speak in terms of hypotheticals...."
__________________________________
* https://www.revisor.mn.gov/court_rules/ev/id/408/

The corresponding Federal Rule of Evd is similar: Rule 408 - Compromise Offers and Negotiations | 2021 Federal Rules of Evidence
 
Last edited:

magnolia

War Eagle
Joined
Sep 12, 2005
Messages
89,653
Reaction score
1,146
I'm still trying to figure out if his inactions are enough for even manslaughter. Meaning... if I'm unsure of the cause of his death, or even if the force was allowable or not, Chauvin/other officers not providing cpr in what can be deemed a 'reasonable' amount of time is enough to find him guilty of something.

I found this paper that was written sometime in 2020 the other night. It talks mainly about shooting victims, but it's about the responsibility of LE in providing medical aid. It's interesting.

https://kb.osu.edu/bitstream/handle/1811/92251/1/OSJCL_V18N1_391.pdf

Although the Supreme Court has held that suspects who suffer an injury during arrest should receive “the needed medical treatment,”47 the Court has so far not defined what constitutes treatment and who is obligated to provide it. The Court has also refused to consider the issue of whether an officer violates the Constitution by failing to provide first aid to an individual whom they have shot.48 Several lower courts, however, have considered the issue and have typically resolved the issue in favor of the officers who failed to render any first aid after a police-involved shooting
Thanks for posting. Interesting read.
 

magnolia

War Eagle
Joined
Sep 12, 2005
Messages
89,653
Reaction score
1,146
I can see where Nelson came up with the idea to make the jury think he said, "I ate too many drugs," since the officer said, "he's eatin all kinds a stuff," in this video.

From the way George was mumbling and slurring his words, he appeared to be more intoxicated that time than on the day he died. He seemed perfectly coherent that day. He was speaking clearly right up until he lost consciousness.

I don't know how many times he said "why you do me like that," but that's not nearly as important as the amount of times he said, "I can't breathe!"
Yes, he continously said, "I can't breathe" when they tried to put him in the police cruiser.
 

missy1974

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2008
Messages
10,142
Reaction score
31,354
How soon would others have expected the ambulance to arrive? The code 3 was issued when it was already on its way. Meaning that they headed to the scene within at least 1min 24secs of receiving the code 2 alert. Probably just enough time to hurriedly gather themselves and hop in the ambulance.


While paramedics were on their way to the scene, the call was upgraded to Code 3, allowing the driver to rush to the scene with lights and sirens blaring.
Paramedic Says George Floyd Was Unresponsive When They Arrived At The Scene | KFI AM 640

I don't know... and I never thought much about it until GH, the off duty FF, said she didn't believe it.

IMO I think it was a lack of communication. When it was called in as a code 3 (at 8:21:35) fire should have responded (after being dispatched), and I believe, like GH, that they would have been there sooner. When fire was dispatched, around 8:28 or something, it DID only take them a few minutes to respond IIRC

Where I live, I would expect them within a few minutes, but here if you call 911 for a medical reason, both respond because all our FF's are paramedics, so it's whoever gets their first. This was different though, it was done through radio, through LE/dispatch/EMS/Fire, so even where I live, I don't know what their normal response time would be in that case.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top