I think there’s no question that Derek Chauvin should have won his appeal, but I would have been utterly shocked if he had. That’s the state of the legal system, especially in a place like Minnesota. The case will probably be further appealed, perhaps all the way to SCOTUS. But I have a strong feeling that the Supreme Court would refuse to hear it, because it’s so explosive a case and the consequences of ruling in his favor are so potentially catastrophic. So why not punt?
Powerline has two articles about the appeal, and I suggest you read them. I’m in agreement with the views of John Hinderaker, expressed here, as well what Scott Johnson writes here.
From Johnson:
Today the Court of Appeals affirmed Chauvin’s conviction. The opinion of the court is posted online here. On the issue of venue that court held that the trial judge “does not abuse [his] discretion by denying” change of venue if he takes “mitigating steps and verifies that the jurors can set aside their impressions or opinions and deliver a fair and impartial verdict.”
The court’s discussion of the issue at pages 14-20 has an air of unreality that is entirely in keeping with the trial itself. “[W]ith a few very limited exceptions, the [pretrial} publicity was generally factual in nature.” The court drops footnote 4 in that sentence referring to “statements by the MPD police chief and the commissioner of public safety describing the incident as a ‘murder’ before he was convicted. However,” the court adds, “because the district court took numerous mitigating steps and verified that the jurors could decide the case fairly and impartially, we conclude that this properly eliminated any potential prejudice among the seated jurors.” The court does not note that Governor Walz and Attorney General Ellison did so as well, or that the pervasive atmosphere in the Twin Cities was one of mob justice. As I say, unreal.
If this atmosphere wasn’t prejudicial, then nothing is.
From Hinderaker:
The Court of Appeals was no more willing to risk inciting riots than the Chauvin jurors were….
On the day of his death, George Floyd ingested three times a lethal dose of fentanyl. He showed the classic symptoms of a fentanyl overdose–most notably, difficulty breathing, which he complained of for 20 minutes before anyone knelt on him. Two months before the fatal Memorial Day incident, the same thing happened: Floyd overdosed on fentanyl. He was rushed to the hospital, where he spent three days and the doctors saved his life. The only thing that was different on Memorial Day, in my opinion, was that the ambulance didn’t arrive in time. I think the police officers were bystanders at at one of many thousands of fentanyl overdose deaths.
In my view, the medical testimony at the trial showed little evidence of death by suffocation. There was no significant physical evidence that Floyd suffocated; the prosecution’s testimony was mainly directed to showing that it is possible to suffocate without leaving evidence in the autopsy.
Hinderaker also mentions that the city of Minneapolis “announced that it would pay $8.9 million to two alleged victims of police brutality by Derek Chauvin.” In the two cases, each of which occurred years before the Floyd case, Chauvin used the “knee on neck or shoulder” technique that he used for Floyd – and which at the time was an acknowledged and recommended technique in Minneapolis for subduing certain categories of suspects.
One of those suspects got $1.375 million from the city for a case that originated in 2017 when “she allegedly tried to strangle her mother with an extension cord.” Chauvin was called to the scene, subduing her with the hold. The person in the other case, John Pope, received $7.5 million. Hinderaker adds this:
“Pope’s lawsuit said his mother was drunk when she called the police because she was upset that he and his 16-year-old sister left their cellphone chargers plugged in, leading to a physical confrontation. It alleged Chauvin struck Pope in the head with a large metal flashlight at least four times. It says he then put Pope in a chokehold before pinning him to the floor and putting his knee on Pope’s neck.”
No hint as to why Chauvin “struck Pope in the head with a large metal flashlight,” etc., other than a vague reference to a “physical confrontation.”
I think I can clear that up. In a post I wrote in 2021, I mentioned the Pope case, although not by name. I’m pretty sure it’s the same case:
A knee on the neck of a 14-year-old for 17 minutes. What a vicious, racist brute – right? Lost is the fact that the Minneapolis police listed that hold in its recommended ways to subdue resistant offenders (it has since been removed from the manual, post-Floyd). Lost also are these other facts, which I would consider salient [emphasis mine]:
“Prosecutors detail the Sept. 4, 2017, arrest in the court filing, saying Chauvin and another officer named Wells responded to a domestic assault call in which the mom said she’d been assaulted by her son and daughter.
After 33 seconds of talking to the boy, telling him he was being arrested, both officers grabbed him and when he resisted, Chauvin hit him with a flashlight twice, at which point the boy called out for his mom and said they were hurting him, prosecutors say.
“Chauvin then asked the other officer to Taser the boy, but he didn’t have one, so Chauvin applied a neck restraint that caused the boy to lose consciousness and go to the ground, prosecutors said. The officers handcuffed him behind his back while Chauvin knelt on him for about 17 minutes until after paramedics arrived and they put him in an ambulance.
“During the time Chauvin’s knee was on his back, the boy – whose ear was bleeding – repeatedly told officers he couldn’t breathe and asked to be placed on his back, which didn’t happen, prosecutors said.”
Another thing that didn’t happen was that being in that position for 17 minutes didn’t seem to physically harm the 14-year-old at all, much less kill him.
Prosecutors tried to introduce this evidence in Chauvin’s trial, but the judge refused. This is of interest also:
Chauvin’s attorney Eric Nelson responded to the state’s motion [to introduce video of the incident with the 14-year-old], arguing the video shouldn’t be admissible because the force Chauvin used in the 2017 arrest was in line with the department’s policy on dealing with uncooperative suspects, adding that Chauvin’s use of force was “reported to supervisors and cleared.”
“The state makes a point of noting that the suspect was rolled onto his stomach and cuffed while Mr. Chauvin used his knee and body weight to pin the suspect to the floor. As noted previously, this is how MPD officers are trained to handcuff individuals — particularly suspects who are resisting,” Nelson wrote, adding that there is “no marked similarity” between this incident and the Floyd incident.
The Minneapolis Police Department has since changed its use of force policy. In June, after Floyd’s death, it banned chokeholds and neck restraints.
In that 2021 post, I also used quote from a document Chauvin’s attorney filed in Chauvin’s original trial, that mentioned he had used neck restraints on eight occasions during his tenure as a police officer in Minneapolis. The document added that these:
…takedown and restraint techniques [were] taught and approved by the MPD. [Chauvin’s] “modus operandi” was simply that of a Minneapolis Police officer performing his duties and reacting as the circumstances, in which he was present and where the State’s attorneys were not, dictated. The State’s attempt to characterize these incidents as evidence of some kind of ill intent or common scheme of violence that is somehow unique to Chauvin is specious, at best. Finally, in each of the above incidents, the State attempts to characterize Mr. Chauvin’s use of force as “unreasonable” or “beyond what was needed.” Mr. Chauvin reported his use of force to the department in each of the above incidents,and in every single one, it was determined by a supervisor that Mr. Chauvin’s use of force was reasonable in the circumstances and authorized by law and MPD Policy. In essence, to the extent that his use of force was at all questioned — of which the State has offered no evidence — Mr. Chauvin was “acquitted” by MPD supervisors of applying force in a manner that was either unreasonable or unauthorized.
Now, even though the two people awarded the money in compensation were apparently uninjured, and both had allegedly tried to kill their parents, the city of Minneapolis – which no longer recommends these techniques – is compensating them with big awards. But Chauvin is the scapegoat for the whole sorry mess.
