Chauvin was convicted on all 3 counts but I don’t think that is admissible in the other officers trial(s). If it was it would be an open and shut case against them for standing by while watching a fellow officer murdered someone.
1 Like
IANAL, but why would the fact that Chauvin was convicted be inadmissible? Is that something you’re saying is generally true, or did the judge specifically not allow it in this case?
I don’t know if they’re still having pre-trial hearings for those guys or not.
It’s something that is generally true.
Never bring a knife to a gun fight.
The video/audio will show that she did not “consciously” pull her gun.
lol, nicely done
I guess that is the approach that they will go with, except that all of her actions and not just “accidentally” pulling her sidearm are part of her conscious actions that create great bodily harm to another.
We will see.
Her “conscious” actions were to use reasonable force given the circumstances.
Tazers cause bodily harm, but generally not life threatening, just enough to allow the police to control the suspect. That’s the extent of her conscious actions.
Of course, that’s my take on the defense argument. Like you, I have no idea how the jury will process this.
1 Like
And undone
46% of Republicans surveyed believe Chauvin was wrongfully convicted.
That’s interesting. I was a juror in a felony assault case and it was absolutely admissible that all 3 of the defendants’s buddies involved in the melee pled guilty and he was the only one to plead not guilty.
The defense brought in one of the buddies to testify. On cross-examination the prosecutor was asking the buddy all about his guilty plea and if it was really self-defense (as the defendant claimed) then why didn’t the buddy plead not guilty too. Asked the buddy if the buddy was lying in court when he said he was guilty. Got the buddy to say that it wasn’t actually self-defense.
The defense attorney never objected, so I assume they were legit questions by the prosecutor. 
That’s the kind of thing that might vary by jurisdiction. It was certainly pretty damning that the buddy said “no, it wasn’t self-defense” and probably a mistake by the defense to call the buddy as a witness.
So she didn’t commit murder 1 or probably even murder 2.
Still sounds a lot like manslaughter or negligent homicide.
She got charged with both, right? IANAL, but my gut was manslaughter in this instance, but the circumstances of this case are so crazy that I wouldn’t make any bets on any outcome.
Guilty plea seems different than jury trial. Also you had cooperating witness against the defendant. The prosecution can probably try to call Chauvin as a witness, I don’t know.
But it said the guilty verdict could not directly be brought up by the prosecution in the other trial. I imagine it would prejudice the jury. But I’m not a lawyer either.
Just like prior bad acts are often excluded. I’m pretty sure the prosecution wanted to bring in Several of Chauvin’s prior use of force complaints including one eerily similar to Floyd but didn’t result in death of a black teen, but the judge did not allow it.
Yeah after the trial was over I looked up the defendant. Turned out he was also on trial for stealing stereo equipment from a store in the mall. That never came up at his assault trial… I assume it would have been considered prejudicial.
We didn’t do sentencing… just found him guilty and that was the end of our jury duty. I’ve tried to figure out what his sentence was, but I never figured out how to find that out.
I thought that wasn’t allowed. Like he could choose to take the stand in his defense, which would give the prosecutor the chance to cross-examine him.
But I didn’t think the prosecutor could call him to testify if he didn’t want to. IANAL.
BTW, in my jury case the defendant did take the stand. Also probably a poor decision. The prosecutor got him to repeat several times that he stabbed an unarmed man.
I think yt is talking about the trials of the other officers. I’m not clear if you are too…
Oh, I see. Yeah the prosecutor can probably force Chauvin to testify at the trials of the other cops as a hostile witness.