Judge drops 3rd degree murder charge against Chauvin

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
21,676
Reaction score
4,763
Points
113
I'm vaguely recalling that the 3rd degree charge was mainly to allow the other three officers to be charged with aiding and abetting, as a felony charge? Or something like that.

Regardless, the article says those charges will be allowed to move forward for all three.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
21,676
Reaction score
4,763
Points
113
Minnesota Statutes for 2nd degree unintentional murder: https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.19

Subd. 2.Unintentional murders.

Whoever does either of the following is guilty of unintentional murder in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 40 years:

(1) causes the death of a human being, without intent to effect the death of any person, while committing or attempting to commit a felony offense other than criminal sexual conduct in the first or second degree with force or violence or a drive-by shooting; or

(2) causes the death of a human being without intent to effect the death of any person, while intentionally inflicting or attempting to inflict bodily harm upon the victim, when the perpetrator is restrained under an order for protection and the victim is a person designated to receive protection under the order. As used in this clause, "order for protection" includes an order for protection issued under chapter 518B; a harassment restraining order issued under section 609.748; a court order setting conditions of pretrial release or conditions of a criminal sentence or juvenile court disposition; a restraining order issued in a marriage dissolution action; and any order issued by a court of another state or of the United States that is similar to any of these orders.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
21,676
Reaction score
4,763
Points
113
I mean, just reading #2 there, he looks pretty damn guilty of that, to me as a layperson.

Of course, their defense will be designed to introduce doubt that the kneeling on his neck did not actually cause his death. That's what they're going to throw up as a hail mary, and hope like hell. Also, getting the venue moved outside Hennepin County, if they can get it.
 

CurveballJesus

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 10, 2012
Messages
1,427
Reaction score
172
Points
63
Didn't see this anywhere else, but the NYT, AP and Strib just nuked the Chauvin trial.



This destroys whatever small chance there was for a fair trial. This is 1st year law school inadmissible evidence that the defense can point to for literally every juror who can read. They are trying to put the genie back in the bottle by hiding it now and apparently it's working.

If it is determined that someone from the prosecution leaked it, the case will be dismissed because of prosecutorial misconduct. That said, it would be likely that this is the case, as it would be massively stupid of them.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
6,060
Reaction score
2,937
Points
113
Chauvin was ready to plead guilty to third degree murder three days after George Floyd died. Bill Barr nixed it. WTF?
I think this would have been good...

 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
6,060
Reaction score
2,937
Points
113
Didn't see this anywhere else, but the NYT, AP and Strib just nuked the Chauvin trial.



This destroys whatever small chance there was for a fair trial. This is 1st year law school inadmissible evidence that the defense can point to for literally every juror who can read. They are trying to put the genie back in the bottle by hiding it now and apparently it's working.

If it is determined that someone from the prosecution leaked it, the case will be dismissed because of prosecutorial misconduct. That said, it would be likely that this is the case, as it would be massively stupid of them.
Maybe your problem should be with Bill Barr.

This explains why that big press conference right when the protests/riots started fizzed out to nothing. Imagine how much less destruction may have happened.

Its on Bill Barr and Trump for appointing him.

Now we could get a second round of riots when the trial happens.
 

CurveballJesus

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 10, 2012
Messages
1,427
Reaction score
172
Points
63
Chauvin was ready to plead guilty to third degree murder three days after George Floyd died. Bill Barr nixed it. WTF?
I think this would have been good...

NYT article says he worried it would be seen as too light and Ellison's office was about to take over, so he wanted to let them make their own decisions before taking it out of their hands. Also, it probably wouldn't have stuck anyway, since 3rd degree clearly was the wrong charge, as identified by numerous legal minds essentially right away, including the ACLU.

I think it was leaked by someone who thought they were dunking on Barr (thanks for reinforcing that) and ended up spiking the case
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
6,060
Reaction score
2,937
Points
113
I think it was leaked by someone who thought they were dunking on Barr (thanks for reinforcing that) and ended up spiking the case
So you think we are in a better spot as a State and country because Bill Barr rejected that?

Really?
Explain why....

I don't give a shit, I want it in the rear view, Chauvin pleading guilty and in jail helps that. I see nothing good for MN coming out of this trial and lots of bad scenarios that could play out. Does that concern you?

Look at the big picture...
 

CurveballJesus

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 10, 2012
Messages
1,427
Reaction score
172
Points
63
I think it was an entirely reasonable decision at the time. Him pleading to the lowest possible murder charge would have done nothing to quell any of the anger, if anything it would have made it worse. So many were demanding 1st degree charges. Ellison and his office would have been FUMING if it was taken out of their hands. They wanted the higher charge and still want it.

Ask any attorney and they will agree it was the right decision at the time.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
6,060
Reaction score
2,937
Points
113
Ask any attorney and they will agree it was the right decision at the time.
I am not arguing the law, I am arguing common sense.

You don't think the downside risk right now is exponentially higher than if Chauvin was serving a long prison sentence?
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
6,060
Reaction score
2,937
Points
113
Him pleading to the lowest possible murder charge would have done nothing to quell any of the anger, if anything it would have made it worse.
You have absolutely nothing to back that up with.
 

CurveballJesus

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 10, 2012
Messages
1,427
Reaction score
172
Points
63
I am not arguing the law, I am arguing common sense.

You don't think the downside risk right now is exponentially higher than if Chauvin was serving a long prison sentence?
No, you're arguing hindsight
 

CurveballJesus

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 10, 2012
Messages
1,427
Reaction score
172
Points
63
You have absolutely nothing to back that up with.
You're right, I'm sure the lowest possible sentence in a nice federal facility in protective custody with immunity from Civil Rights lawsuits would have made everyone feel warm and fuzzy inside.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
6,060
Reaction score
2,937
Points
113
No, you're arguing hindsight
No common sense, that was going to come out after the first day of riots.

I distinctly remember the news conference, watching it and how I was like wtf they didn't say anything. I remember perfectly and my position at that time would be exactly the same.
 

forever a gopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
1,633
Reaction score
619
Points
113
I think it was an entirely reasonable decision at the time. Him pleading to the lowest possible murder charge would have done nothing to quell any of the anger, if anything it would have made it worse. So many were demanding 1st degree charges. Ellison and his office would have been FUMING if it was taken out of their hands. They wanted the higher charge and still want it.

Ask any attorney and they will agree it was the right decision at the time.
Publicly, yes. But think if you're Ellison/AG's office- anything less than convictions on all charges will be seen as a failure and will result in rioting. They are politicians and they like to pass the buck. If the feds took the deal and took it out of Ellison's hands, it would have been best case scenario for him. He could get on his soapbox, and claim he would have gotten stronger convictions, but he wouldn't have had the chance to lose the trial.

After reading this article, I thought that the protestors/rioters would have been more upset had they taken the deal. But they were already damaging everything. How much worse could it have gotten? Then you limit the destruction to one event, instead of two (if he is found not guilty). Besides, is public opinion really the reason you do/do not take deals/guilty pleas? Long term, this would have been better for pretty much everybody involved.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
6,060
Reaction score
2,937
Points
113
You're right, I'm sure the lowest possible sentence in a nice federal facility in protective custody with immunity from Civil Rights lawsuits would have made everyone feel warm and fuzzy inside.
You really think a civil rights lawsuit will make people feel warm and fuzzy?

His jail experience won't be different based on the charge, you think they throw him in general now? What exactly is the point of that stupid comment????

I am sure second degree murder instead of thrid degree will make everyone so satisfied....
ROTFLMAO

Get him in jail on a muder charge, any murder charge and put it in the rearview is obviously the lowest risk scenario. Lowest risk for mass destruction.

You think we are in a safer place as a society with this upcoming trail than if Chauvin was serving a third degree murder sentence?
 
Last edited:

CurveballJesus

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 10, 2012
Messages
1,427
Reaction score
172
Points
63
Publicly, yes. But think if you're Ellison/AG's office- anything less than convictions on all charges will be seen as a failure and will result in rioting. They are politicians and they like to pass the buck. If the feds took the deal and took it out of Ellison's hands, it would have been best case scenario for him. He could get on his soapbox, and claim he would have gotten stronger convictions, but he wouldn't have had the chance to lose the trial.

After reading this article, I thought that the protestors/rioters would have been more upset had they taken the deal. But they were already damaging everything. How much worse could it have gotten? Then you limit the destruction to one event, instead of two (if he is found not guilty). Besides, is public opinion really the reason you do/do not take deals/guilty pleas? Long term, this would have been better for pretty much everybody involved.
You're severely underestimating the ego of high-powered lawyers. He wants this, he wants to be the one to get the convictions. It's personal for him (as it should be).
 

CurveballJesus

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 10, 2012
Messages
1,427
Reaction score
172
Points
63
You really think a civil rights lawsuit will make people feel warm and fuzzy?

His jail experience won't be different based on the charge, you think they throw him in general now? What exactly is the point of that stupid comment????

I am sure second degree murder instead of thrid degree will make everyone so satisfied....
ROTFLMAO

Get him in jail on a muder charge, any murder charge and put it in the rearview is obviously the lowest risk scenario.

Depravation of civil rights charges can add years onto his sentence, up to life sentence since George Floyd died. He could serve 9 years or he could serve life. It matters. That is the point.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
6,060
Reaction score
2,937
Points
113
You're severely underestimating the ego of high-powered lawyers. He wants this, he wants to be the one to get the convictions. It's personal for him (as it should be).
No, it shouldn't be personal, that is asinine. He should be looking out primarily for the state of MN.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
6,060
Reaction score
2,937
Points
113
Depravation of civil rights charges can add years onto his sentence, up to life sentence since George Floyd died. He could serve 9 years or he could serve life. It matters. That is the point.
I don't think it really does. I think his life ruined and a decade in jail is probably appropriate for this crime. I don't think he intended to kill him obviously. Lacking intent, I can't say I believe more than a decade is reasonable.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
46,924
Reaction score
2,706
Points
113
Didn't see this anywhere else, but the NYT, AP and Strib just nuked the Chauvin trial.



This destroys whatever small chance there was for a fair trial. This is 1st year law school inadmissible evidence that the defense can point to for literally every juror who can read. They are trying to put the genie back in the bottle by hiding it now and apparently it's working.

If it is determined that someone from the prosecution leaked it, the case will be dismissed because of prosecutorial misconduct. That said, it would be likely that this is the case, as it would be massively stupid of them.
You lost me. What happened?
 

CurveballJesus

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 10, 2012
Messages
1,427
Reaction score
172
Points
63
I don't think it really does. I think his life ruined and a decade in jail is probably appropriate for this crime. I don't think he intended to kill him obviously. Lacking intent, I can't say I believe more than a decade is reasonable.
I'm not arguing what is an appropriate sentence. What I am saying is that with the climate at the time, a 3rd degree plea with immunity to federal charges, would have been seen as light punishment, as evidenced by how incensed people were with him only being charged with 3rd degree, let alone sentenced for it. That anger sparked the Governor to change prosecutors.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
46,924
Reaction score
2,706
Points
113
You're severely underestimating the ego of high-powered lawyers. He wants this, he wants to be the one to get the convictions. It's personal for him (as it should be).
It should be personal? For the attorney general?
 

CurveballJesus

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 10, 2012
Messages
1,427
Reaction score
172
Points
63
You lost me. What happened?
Chauvin said he would plead guilty to 3rd degree murder charges 3 days after the event. Part of his request was that he be granted immunity from civil rights charges, meaning that Barr had to sign off on it. Barr declined. No deal happened.

The fact that he was willing to plead guilty is obviously damning to his case. However, evidence of plea negotiations is on it's face inadmissible. Because this story has leaked, every potential juror now has the knowledge that the defendant has already effectively confessed. Finding a pool of jurors who don't know this will be really difficult, if not impossible to find now.

Put another way, if someone had brought this up in court, it most likely would have resulted in a mistrial. Can't put that cat back in the bag by telling jurors to disregard it.
 

tikited

Me
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
15,207
Reaction score
1,832
Points
113
Chauvin said he would plead guilty to 3rd degree murder charges 3 days after the event. Part of his request was that he be granted immunity from civil rights charges, meaning that Barr had to sign off on it. Barr declined. No deal happened.

The fact that he was willing to plead guilty is obviously damning to his case. However, evidence of plea negotiations is on it's face inadmissible. Because this story has leaked, every potential juror now has the knowledge that the defendant has already effectively confessed. Finding a pool of jurors who don't know this will be really difficult, if not impossible to find now.

Put another way, if someone had brought this up in court, it most likely would have resulted in a mistrial. Can't put that cat back in the bag by telling jurors to disregard it.
Thanks for that.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
6,060
Reaction score
2,937
Points
113
I'm not arguing what is an appropriate sentence. What I am saying is that with the climate at the time, a 3rd degree plea with immunity to federal charges, would have been seen as light punishment, as evidenced by how incensed people were with him only being charged with 3rd degree, let alone sentenced for it. That anger sparked the Governor to change prosecutors.
Honestly, I believe most black people would be happy with any murder charge sticking. Now if your talking about the loudest screamer on twitter, no, but by in large they would be considering police very rarely suffer consequences for anything they do.

I have watched a cop do something to an animal that made me sick to my stomach. It was basically what Chauvin did to George Floyd. I thought about filming it but honestly how does it help me to fuck with the cops. Nothing good would come of it and I have a family to think about.
 

Angry

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 8, 2012
Messages
1,790
Reaction score
337
Points
83
I hope that fentanyl gets the chair!
 

Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
18,634
Reaction score
3,593
Points
113
You have absolutely nothing to back that up with.
Don't you remember how upset the public was when he was only charged with 3rd degree murder to start? I rememeber listening to many lawyers on the radio explaining why that was all they could do for now, but that 2nd degree charges would likely follow. If Barr would have taken this out of Ellison's hands and accepted a 3rd degree plea just 3-days after it happened it absolutely would have caused as much if not more anger, rioting, and distruction. I can see Howie's posts now.
 
Top Bottom