www.cbsnews.com/news/supreme-court-derek-chauvin-george-floyd/
Supreme Court declines appeal from Derek Chauvin in murder of George Floyd
I'm rubbing my temples at those quotes from his lawyer.
Yeah dude, it's going to be hard to find people who are impartial towards the idea of a man murdered in cold blood without consequence.
I spent several years as a public defender. I've made several such arguments before. The goal in criminal defense is to ensure that the defendant isn't deprived of their due process rights and that the system works "fairly." We know going in that these types of claims have little chance to succeed, but it is usually worthwhile to put forth the argument even if the tiniest sliver of merit exists with the argument. If we are willing to deprive one person of their rights that just makes it easier to deprive others of their rights.
It's also a misunderstanding that potential jurors can't be pre-exposed to an event. For an offense as highly publicized as this one that would have been absolutely impossible to find a jury pool not already exposed to what happened. Changing the venue wouldn't change that. During the Voir Dire/jury selection process you ask the potential jurors whether or not they can decide the case impartially and you kind of just have to take their word for it.
But yeah, a lot of criminal defense work is just throwing a bunch of dry spaghetti at the wall and hoping it sticks. Chauvin is a dickhead and deserves the penalty that he got, but he doesn't deserve to be deprived of due process. Just because he deprived others of their rights doesn't mean we should do the same thing to him. But given how the trial and appeals have gone and went it's fairly clear he received the fair treatment that he deprived George Floyd of that day.
If a teenage girl didn’t have her cell phone that day he would never have even been charged, much less convicted.
That’s why they want more “police privacy” laws so they can’t be filmed.
The police should never have an expectation of privacy in the execution of their duties no matter what.
Not only that, but I think it should be a crime for the police to attempt to stop people from filming them.
Like, all those videos you see where someone is recording the police, and then some angry cop comes up to them yelling "TURN OFF THAT CAMERA!" That should be considered destruction of evidence, and they should face criminal charges for that.
And cops should absolutely not be able to turn off their body cameras. Being able to do that defeats the entire point.
Practically speaking, I do think they need an off switch, because sometimes cops need to go into places where it's not appropriate for them to be filming (e.g. when they're going to the bathroom).
That said, if a cop ever turns their camera off during an arrest, that should be an automatic termination at the very least. That's unacceptable.
You could just go with assuming the worst if it's not on camera.
Best of both worlds. They don't have to be recorded and everyone else's word is given more weight if it's off. I imagine a lot more time will go into proper maintenance of those things if that was the case.
They search other people and remove their right to privacy. Charges are dropped after arrests based upon lack of evidence and illegal procedures all of the time.
At this point I don't give a fuck about a cop's right to privacy when there is almost zero trust.
I do think they need an off switch, because sometimes cops need to go into places where it's not appropriate for them to be filming (e.g. when they're going to the bathroom).
Great, make it auditable with a read-only log that includes a mandatory explanation, GPS-tagged location, and time powered off every single time, until it's logged back into secure (from anyone in the police union) storage at the station and the footage is uploaded to a secure (from "accidental" deletion) offsite storage solution managed by an independent non-profit entity with a vested interest in keeping the police in check. Track down the problem officers who take lots of "bathroom breaks" in areas where police brutality is frequent.
They want to be the big man in charge, well guess what, that kind of responsibility comes with accountability, and they need to be held to it.
If they didn't a use this already to get false convictions and plant evidence on people, that might make sense. But it still happens without any repercussions, whoops camera fell off or turned off or I accidentally stood in front of it when this person was shot oh well. The citizens have a right to accountability for public servants, public records must be available.
Practically speaking, I do think they need an off switch, because sometimes cops need to go into places where it's not appropriate for them to be filming (e.g. when they're going to the bathroom).
If it makes me even 10% less likely to be shot to death by a dude having a bad day, the guys back at the station can watch me pee all they want.
Practically speaking the body cam is not angled to capture an image of their genitals anyhow.
If they don't commit a crime in the bathroom then theres no reason for anyone to watch said inside a bathroom footage and it won't be released.
Theres no reason for an on duty officer to be able to turn off their cameras
Practically speaking, I do think they need an off switch, because sometimes cops need to go into places where it's not appropriate for them to be filming (e.g. when they're going to the bathroom).
Nope, if they are on duty, they are on duty. Doesn't matter if they are pooping or they are having sex.
Remember, just because it is recording does not mean it is live on twitch tv.
"If you have done nothing wrong, you have nothing to fear," they tell us.
I feel the same way about politicians. If you want that much power over others, you should have to give something up in return.
Still want them to wear those NASCAR-esque sponsor suits plastered with the logos of corporations and with the size dictated by the amount they bribed "donated" to the politicians.
I always like the idea that when I do my taxes I get a receipt. Where is my money going?
Should be a requirement to live stream the daily lives of every politician, all day, everyday. Like some kind of Truman Show.
I personally don't need live footage of trump rage tweeting from the toilet 6 hours a days.
Where did I read NYPd is updating there communications to a new platform.. that can not be heard on a scanner …troubling
Many police departments have switched to digital systems with encryption for their radios
Supreme court already ruled they don't have any duty to act.
So if they don't have a duty, their actions are all voluntary.... no expectation to arrest, so choosing to arrest isn't actually part of their mandated job, so I'm ruling no more qualified immunity.
The police should never have an expectation of privacy
in the execution of their dutiesno matter what.
Even off duty cops frequently use their knowledge and connections to get away with grievous harm so...
They literally want to be able to violate people’s constitutional and human rights, and kill them if necessary without consequence. Not a good look.
Sure is convinent that all those chest cams they have for "our protection" seemingly never are working when some shit goes down
I can't remember the name of the victim, but 5 cops beat the shit out of a guy a while back and it's pretty damn clear that one of them thought he turned his bodycam off. If he had, and they hadn't been right under a street camera, they probably would have gotten away with it.
They literally picked him up off the ground, one cop under each armpit like a movie/TV beatdown, and one of the officers started throwing haymakers at this delirious and nearly unconscious dude while shouting "stop resisting".
Sounds like the Tyre Nichols case in Memphis.
That's correct, yes, thanks for the name. I'd try to find it, but "police beating video" isn't really specific enough to get anything worthwhile on a Google search.
I watched the like ~45 minute video compilation from the traffic cam and the cop bodycam the day it occurred or the day after and it was fucking brutal.
Yeah I watched it right after too cause it happened around the corner from where I grew up. Couldn't fucking believe what I was watching.
I was in a situation where a cop covered his chest cam.
It was to give me advice on how circumvent an issue the other 5 cops were trying to put me in.
It didn't fix everything, but saved me from being robbed by them.
The way I heard it put (about Anders Brevik IIRC, but applies to every time a total wrong'un is in the dock) was "in cases like this the defence lawyer is there to defend the law, not the defendant".
Very well said. When people used to ask me how I could defend someone I thought did what they were accused of, my answer would usually be some form of :
Guilty people have Constitutional rights too
My favorite response is that Public Defenders don't defend guilty people, in our system no one is guilty until it has been proven in a court of law. Defense attorneys make damn well sure the government can prove it and follow all of its rules to the T before it gets to lock someone in a cage.
Unfortunately, police appear to have a different standard test for criminality and civil liability. Qualified immunity, their word over eye witnesses, lack of discipline by unions, "I feared for my life", "I though I saw a weapon", "decisions in real time", police have the ability and all the trappings of legally murdering ppl. Only irrefutable evidence of malfeasance on video will get a charge, let alone conviction. A private person doing the same actions would be in jail immediately and likely convicted for many of these police killings.
QE and police unions need to go. Cops should be held to a higher standard, not a lower one.
It pains me so much as someone who supports unions, but yeah, the police unions are toxic and the culture is toxic.
The head of the police union in my city got caught trying to frame a sitting city council member for a hit and run after she made criticisms of the police. He got a job with a different police department but eventually got his original job back, and didn’t resign the new own so he was drawing two paychecks from different municipalities for several months before one of them found out.
I feel bad saying this, but why would anyone play by the rules with cops when they have shown they themselves do NOT play by those rules?
If you expect a situation to resolve itself fairly, you are NOT dealing with a fair player or someone that will follow the rules.
Tell them what they need to hear, not what they want to know unless it aligns with what you also want.
Chauvin is a dickhead and deserves the penalty that he got, but he doesn't deserve to be deprived of due process.
An old friend of mine is a Public Defender. I asked him once how he dealt with defending scumbags who are clearly guilty. His answer was compelling:
First, it is an inherently Good Thing to keep the government honest at all times.
Second, the scumbags who are clearly guilty are practice for the not rare enough occasions of an innocent person being in the wrong place & wrong time, a cop on a power trip, or a new DA that wants to make a name for himself.
Made sense to me then, it makes even more sense to me now.
But yeah, a lot of criminal defense work is just throwing a bunch of dry spaghetti at the wall and hoping it sticks
But given how the trial and appeals have gone and went it's fairly clear he received the fair treatment that he deprived George Floyd of that day.
I understand the principle behind doing your best to ensure due process. What I don't understand is why so many lawyers act like pundits. The highest court in the land denied this appeal, yet Chauvin's lawyer is continuing to insist their client was deprived of due process. Who does this help? Are they just taking it personally now?
Marketing? More likely to get future clients seems like a good personal reason. That's my best guess.
Yet Chauvin's lawyer is continuing to insist their client was deprived of due process. Who does this help? Are they just taking it personally now?
Because it's a lawyer's job to fight tooth and nail for their client. They are an advocate, that is their primary obligation. It's part of being in an adversarial justice system, there is an ethical obligation to pursue every legitimate means possible for your client even if the chances of it going somewhere are unlikely (assuming that is what the client wants). For criminal defense, many also believe that optics and public messaging is part of this duty.
For an offense as highly publicized as this one that would have been absolutely impossible to find a jury pool not already exposed to what happened.
I like the line in there that he wouldn't have pled guilty if he knew of alternate causes of death.
Well, see, that's sort of the whole case innit?
I'm also curious what the fuck he's even talking about. Even before the trial the police were screaming that he had a pre-existing heart condition or was on drugs, and that was really the cause of his death.
And it's not like changing venues would have helped them escape their defendant's notoriety. Everyone and their dog had seen the coverage, if not the actual full length video itself. There were protests halfway around the world. Everyone knew the names Derek Chauvin and George Floyd.
With video evidence
Do I think the Jury pool was tainted because of the protests and media coverage? Sure. Would it have mattered if they moved the venue? Not in the slightest. Dude deserves the sentences he got, and probably more.
Dude was looking for a jury of Maga
Even then, no guarantee. I've heard some of the furthest right-wing pro-cop folks admit that he went too far. The footage is just to damning for most people to justify, outside of literal psychopaths.
Also there are many people on the right that are just as Anti-Cop as much of the left.
I remember the Brianna Taylor case brought up a fuckload of hellfire from the gun crowd (Though the gun crowd tends to be a lot more mixed politically than Reddit like to think it is).
He wanted to be tried in St Cloud area then, that's where the wacko Michelle bachmann is from. Heavy red area in MN
The more rural the better. I’m sure they would have preferred Marshall if they could have gotten it.
I mean it's a valid point it's hard to find 12 people that haven't formed an opinion about a case that makes the national news. Not sure what we can really do about it though, can't exaclty build a jury exclusively with uninformed dumbasses and expect a just outcome either.
“I wouldn’t have plead guilty if I was smart enough to come up with the bullshit others did for me!”
Yeah go fuck yourself pig.
Currently seeking to overturn his federal conviction, arguing he wouldn’t have pleaded guilty if aware of alternative theories on Floyd’s cause of death.
Good luck with that. There's a reason why courts always tell people not to plead guilty unless they really mean it.
I'm shocked "my client murdering someone over the course of 10 minutes in a public street, video recorded by multiple bystanders creates difficulty in finding an impartial jury" wasn't successful.
they’re not “shocked”. they’re paid to do this as their client is requesting it
Chauvin’s appeal centered on the denial of a change of venue and jury sequestration, alleging a compromised fair trial due to pretrial publicity and potential violence.
It sparked a national crisis and nation-wide protests. Where exactly were they thinking that people might not have heard about the case and formed some pre-trial judgement? Wake Island?
SCOTUS denies certiorari in the overwhelming majority of cases--only 1-2% of cases are granted. Also Chauvin committed tax evasion, and received an additional 13-month sentence on top of his murder conviction.
If Chauvin was actually a good cop, he would have attempted to help a man clearly in distress from ingesting too many drugs, like call the EMT's, de-escalate the situation to calm the individual down until medical help arrives, and then make sure he gets to the hospital without conflict. This is good cop, you get a donut.
Instead he pinned the indvidual to the ground and kneeled on his neck until that person was dead. That's bad cop, no donut. Go directly to jail, and don't come out.
This is one of the things I being up when someone mentions it.
"But he had drugs in his system!"
"Ok, why didn't the cop help him?"
"They're not obligated to help save drug addicts! The supreme court said so!"
"Ok, so he intentionally let him die?"
Idiots.
If Chauvin did his job correctly, Floyd would still be alive (probably in jail or some sort rehab right now) and Chauvin would still be cop.
Instead one person is dead, and the other is in prison for a long time...
"had a vested interest in finding Mr. Chauvin guilty in order to avoid further rioting in the community in which they lived and the possible threat of physical harm to them or their families."
I'd like to know where exactly he thought they could move the trial to avoid this? Seriously, guy. Your client murdered someone and set off uprisings up to thousands of miles away.
If everywhere is an unfair venue, than right at home is fair enough.
No shit! Before he murdered George Floyd he terrorized Minneapolis his entire career.
Face your peers, coward.
I always feel it's necessary to remind people when these conversations arise that George Floyd wasn't even the first person that Derek Chauvin had killed while in uniform.
That fact, when combined with Chauvin's many excessive force complaints and numerous counts of tax fraud/evasion, really paints a picture of a violent sociopath who saw himself as above the law.
Prison is exactly where he belongs.
And if not for the video, he'd undoubtedly still be prowling the streets, considered one of "the good ones".
Even with the video evidence you still have tons of people saying "George was obviously going to die right then anyway!" Thankfully Ahmaud Arbery was where even most of my conservative associates drew the line, but you'd still hear people on Reddit now and then trying to pervert it into a self-defense situation for the lynchers.
The fact Arbery’s killers were convicted by a nearly all white southern jury—including one member involved with the local republicans—proves this.
The fact that the people who he tried to hire as defense lawyers leaked the videos instead shows how egregious it was. We only know about this case because an extremely conservative southern lawyer and local good ol' boy was outraged beyond belief.
The /conservative thread about this story is full of comments about how the autopsy found no evidence of strangulation and that George Floyd was a career criminal and drug addict and the jury was tainted and every other excuse they can think of to keep whining about this
Life would be so much easier if I thought like that, or didn't care about good faith. Hey did you know Ashli Babbitt had a heart condition and just happened to die right then anyway? And that besides she was actually Trump's daughter Ivanka pretending to be shot to stir up sympathy for Trump supporters? This dumb bit of crowdsourced innuendo proves it! Etc.
They will try and justify anything, literally anything, if they perceive it as being by 'their team'. And if they can't justify it, then they will just joke about it, like they do with far-right mass murderers.
Thankfully Ahmaud Arbery was where even most of my conservative associates drew the line
Honestly, I still am pleasantly amazed that the jury in that case found his murderer's guilty. The area where the trial was held is incredibly conservative and racist.
And the original DA didn't do shit. Wonder why.
The best argument I ever heard (and I had to use it on my own father), was "Even if George Floyd was guilty of passing fake money (which is what my father tried to pass off), or even if he was a bad dude (another line my dad tried to pass off), what he was doing at the time did not deserve a death sentence. Full stop."
I've come across people saying "bUt He wAS oN DrUGs!!1!" as if that justifies being extrajudicially murdered.
In their mind there are just Good People and Bad People, and Good People (like Rush Limbaugh committing fraud for thousands of pain pills) get to be forgiven for things, while Bad People (anybody who isn't like them, by any criteria) could be killed for behaving inappropriately at some point in their lives.
My argument was always that he didn’t even follow his own departments procedures, which is to get someone having an obvious medical episode the care they need.
I mean, before he murdered George Floyd, he certainly held the view that he was gods gift to the world, that if he wasn't a police officer, who would be?
I think he felt that way after, too.
Wow. I didn't know he'd killed before.
He was one of the 6 officers who shot and killed Wayne Reyes in October 2006 after a car chase. The officers said he pointed a shotgun at them. They were cleared.
In 2008 he shot a domestic violence suspect named Ira Latrell Toles in the torso, he said the suspect went for his gun. Toles survived. He was cleared.
In 2011, he and other officers were chasing a Leroy Martinez when the Officer Terry Nutter shot him. An eyewitness said Martinez had his hands up and had already dropped his gun when he was shot in the chest. The police spokesperson claimed other witnesses refuted this at the time and journalists did no further investigation. Years later, Vice News obtained the police report. Some witnesses said Martinez was not a threat. However, a witness said he still had the gun in his hand and was facing away from the officer when the officer warned he would shoot. A few others said he threw his hands in the air and then the officer shot him. A couple of witnesses also said he threw the gun, raised his hands, and then the officer shot him. Officer Nutter was cleared.
What’s worth noting is that in all 3 of these shootings there was no camera footage. Only the word of the officers involved
What’s worth noting is that in all 3 of these shootings there was no camera footage. Only the word of the officers involved
Officers, by the way, who have an interest in protecting themselves and their work colleagues.
There are two types of cops, bad cops and silent cops. Their silence makes the silent cops complicit. Occasionally you will get a good cop, but the bad ones will make sure they become ex-cops, and the silent cops stay silent.
I'd argue there's 3 types. Bad cops, silent cops, and dead cops. Cops(and their families) who go against the "code" are threatened, and sometimes those threats are fulfilled.
Silent cops are bad cops.
Close, silent cops and loud cops. They’re all bad.
And who are taught and encouraged to lie.
There's studies around that show that somewhere around 85% of police don't even fire their gun in their entire career. Of the remaining 15%, only 20% of those will fire their gun more than once in their career. The ones with multiple shootings in a few years are almost certainly the dangerous ones like Chauvin.
So maybe the 85% should say something and tell their union reps not to protect "the bad apples".
They will never do that.
That 85% is not full of saints. Some of them are "good cops", the rest are just cops that haven't fired a weapon and to them there's an implicit yet at the end of that sentence.
They want that same level of near complete immunity protection if they ever fire their gun, and they want it regardless of whether or us lowly ignorant uninformed civilians agree on the justification of the shooting.
Most of if not all of that 85% is complicit.
The Pareto rule is pretty universal. It's not very surprising that a minority of officers is responsible for a majority of shootings.
The issue is that the majority of officers are also silent about that violent minority.
So 3%ers so to speak.
Chauvin also beat an unarmed 14 year old with a mag lite until he needed stitches. When working as a bouncer for side money he also had a habit of quelling fights by pepper spraying the entire crowd.
Yeah he got federal charges for the incident with a 14 year old. The description of the body cam footage is awful. Even worse than what you described, he also choked the victim and knelt on his back in a way that was restricting his breathing, in other words, slowly suffocating him
I'm sensing a pattern here...
the suspect went for his gun
This needs to be brought up because it is one of the darkest things about a heavily armed police force. The cop brings the gun into every situation and then can claim "he went for my gun" literally any time he shoots someone.
a violent sociopath who saw himself as above the law.
Well he kind of was. And if that girl hadn't videotaped him that day he probably would have gotten away with Floyd's death as well.
Minneapolis woman recalls run-in with officer charged in George Floyd killing: ‘I lived to complain’
After three murders you’re officially known as a serial killer.
I feel like if anything he got off lightly.
I agree.
A life sentence without possibility of parole would have been more appropriate in my opinion.
Gosh I didn’t even know that. I’m extra glad he’s in prison now. Poor George Floyd and his family deserved better than this bag of assholes.
I always want to remind people that Derek Chauvin knew George Floyd previously because they both worked security at the same club on the weekends. There was a co worker who came forward afterward saying that Chauvin absolutely knew Floyd personally and that he was afraid of black people.
I always wonder if George saw Chauvin walking up and thought “oh good here comes someone who knows me and can help,” and then he gets murdered by him.
For anyone that wants an insight into criminal law and is angry at the filing being made in the first place: this is a standard and procedural avenue to pursue.
His guilty verdict still stands, as it should.
Criminal convictions come with the right to appeal. That is inalienable.
The fact that his appeals are being denied are good - they reaffirm the guilty conviction.
Prosecutors have a single goal: a conviction that holds on appeal.
He retains the right to pursue every avenue to appeal possible.
Every time those are rejected strengthen the conviction and sentence not just for Derek but for future cases as well.
NAL but familiar enough with criminal courts that I am always amused his indignant Reddit gets about things like this. Like anyone on here would not appeal a 22 year sentence.
People that get riled up over standard procedural motions don't understand how stressed out defense counsel can get over a credible claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.
It's always so frustrating when people get pissed off at this. Everyone's for criminal justice reform until they know who the criminal is.
Same thing with jury duty, so many people will come up with every strategy under the sun to get out of it simply because they just don't want to do it, but if they were convicted someday I garantuee they'd be begging their lawyer to find a competent jury
Speaking from Minnesota: Good. Let that fucker rot.
Fuck you Derek, go back to your hole and rot.
Even this far-right SCOTUS doesn't want this hot potato.
SCOTUS is really into self-preservation above all else. Overturning this case would end with them being dragged out into the streets.
Overturning this case would end with them being dragged out into the streets.
Didn't happen with Roe.
Yea, but George Floyd saw some of the largest organized protests this country had ever seen, in the middle of COVID lockdown no less. Imagine it happening today when 1/3 of the population isn't as afraid to leave their homes.
those protests got that large precisely because of covid, not in spite of it. people didnt have fuck all else to do at the time besides fixate on a social issue and gamble options on robinhood. should be obvious with how the movement began to fizzle out almost as soon as people began to return to work
That actually has more support.
I live in a middle class & white (right) part of the country. They're extremely pro-life and have made their peace with all the uncomfortable truths of that position.
They are usually very pro-police. When Michael Brown was shot, we held "blue lives matter" rallies.
But something changed in 2020 with George Floyd. That same county was out protesting in force against Police brutality. We were even moving the meter until some dumbass rebranded the movement as "defund the police", which caused all support to disappear overnight.
They are still unshakable for Pro-Life, and still like their police, but Police Brutality is an opening that could be used to make some progress if it makes headlines again.
They are usually very pro-police. When Michael Brown was shot, we held "blue lives matter" rallies.
But something changed in 2020 with George Floyd.
I guess many cops totally lost their moral compass + more and more people inevitably ran into encounters with cops that did not end as they expected (e.g. reporting a property crime just to hear something like "too bad, but we are not going to investigate" and such). 2020 was a kinda unique year, because cops managed to piss off both those who were traditionally very anti-police and those who were pro-police.
I was very pro-police myself up until 2019, had a blue lives matter sticker etc., up until several personal events (not even related to any criminal activity!!) that pretty much turned my attitude upside down.
I think people who were pro police but actually didn’t think they were racist saw the Floyd video and went “holy shit” like how can you not. Only people who seem to be on the side of the police in this one are people who “totally aren’t racist, but…”
"Defund the police" was truly a fuck up in branding.
I think "Police are overburdened and have to respond to all kinds of calls that don't require a man with a gun - so lets hire specialists that can deal with mental health checks, etc and let police do police shit" would be pretty universally supported.
A little too open and shut for them. They prefer when the black guy isn’t just begging for help until he dies on video.
Hard to publicly defend Chauvin, I personally know LOTs of republicans who privately sympathize with him so don’t be surprised when he eventually evades justice
When the vid first came out, I don't remember anyone even trying to defend it. Then people started protesting police brutality and all the right wingers started spreading lies and hot takes.
The 180 was pretty bizarre to watch.
I posted on facebook 2 mins after I saw the video and said something about how disgusting it was.
The responses and dms I got made me realize that I never wanted to post there again. I was so disgusted by my “friends” that I went through and blocked anyone who even somewhat supported Trump (many of whom were family members).
I wrongly assumed that everyone would be as disgusted with this murder as I was. Funny how people show you who they really are. I still haven’t posted on FB since then and likely never will.
Derek's mistake was not taking Clarence Thomas on any fishing trips.
we're headed in the right direction.
police cannot be allowed to murder, rape, etc without impunity. they are not above the law. it's become clear more than ever that modern police are nothing more than the protective force that maintains the status quo for the wealthy elite. just because the bar for being a cop extremely low now days doesn't mean shit. that's the risk you, local PD and government, take when you decide that we should put a gun in the hands of people who can't pass a psych evaluation and have a third grade education.
i think you mean "with impunity". they already have impunity by not being punished the same as a normal citizen
Chauvin is now seeking to overturn his conviction on the federal charge, arguing in a filing last week that he wouldn't have pleaded guilty had he been aware of the theories of a Kansas-based pathologist who does not believe Floyd died as a result of Chauvin's actions.
Autopsy report concluded that it was a homicide due to “cardiopulmonary arrest” from “law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression.”
Without immediate treatment, sudden cardiac arrest can lead to death. Emergency treatment for sudden cardiac arrest includes cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and shocks to the heart with a device called an automated external defibrillator (AED). Survival is possible with fast, appropriate medical care.
Dude, you had your knee on George’s neck for over nine minutes while being recorded. Not even Judge Aileen Cannon isn’t stupid enough to overturn that conviction…
Justice Stevens, writing for the conservative majority: In accordance with the equal protection clause of the Constitution, the Court finds that Mr. Chauvin is a racist piece of shit who murdered an innocent man in cold blood and he is so ordered to shut the fuck up and do his time.
Justice Sotomayor, writing for the liberal minority. Mr. Chauvin is within his rights to talk about his case. He is also a racist piece of shit who would be well-advised to keep his mouth shut while doing his time.
A change of venue would have accomplished nothing in a case as nationally publicized as this.
He only got 22 and a half years for cold blooded murder and he’s whining? He’s lucky he didn’t get life
Still doesn’t think he did anything wrong. He is right where he belongs.
He would be 70 when he gets out so it's as close to life as you can get
I was in a sub last week where there was a post about this case. The collective enthusiasm many had that the court would overturn Chauvin's conviction was very apparent
Comments loaded with racist rants, victim blaming, railroading, and boot-licking.
Anywhoo... I love this for them. Chauvin can rot in hell.
They've been saying this since the day he was found guilty, they'll continue moving the goalposts.
The fact Derek knew and worked with George isn't mentioned enough.
Did we ever find out how well they knew each other?
Can you further elaborate?
Thank you for the article! it says they most likely didint know each other. Not much of a reason to mention i suppose.
This is the part when all those "small government" type voters get super pissed that the government was found liable for outright murdering a dude.
If really is strange to me how "small government" people tend to give the police a free pass to abuse citizens without any consequences. Doesn't sound very small government to me.
Because they’re abusing the right people.
Those fine, upstanding, “law-abiding** citizens” don’t consider themselves among those that would ever have to worry about the cops violating their rights.
**I bet 100% of people who consider themselves “law-abiding” cherry-pick which traffic laws to follow (and when) as hard as they cherry-pick which Bible verses count.
Seems to me “small government” people don’t actually want small government. What they want is government tailored to a very specific goal: the protection of private property above all else. They see cops and the military as a means to their overzealous devotion to private property.
They don't actually want "small government", to them "small government" is little/no taxes and that's it.
They absolutely beat their meat to the thought of fascist heavy handed oppression of minorities, women, lgbt, non-Christians, etc. Banning books, banning free speech of things they don't agree with, banning education, banning alternative energy, etc they all froth at the mouth for.
For them, small government means they want a dictator.
u dont get ur maga jury sry bud
Chauvin is now seeking to overturn his conviction on the federal charge, arguing in a filing last week that he wouldn't have pleaded guilty had he been aware of the theories of a Kansas-based pathologist who does not believe Floyd died as a result of Chauvin's actions.
he's implying he only plead guilty to the charges because he calculated that the jury wouldn't believe he was innocent otherwise, at least without yet another advantageous expert opinion he just found out about.
good for the public that this one is denied by the SCOTUS which means it is likely the last attempt.
This asshole thought a change of venue would help him? Hilarious. The entire nation knows what a POS he is. I hope he cries every day and dies a very painful death.
aw boohoo, maybe next time don’t kneel on someone’s neck until they die. not only that, but also staying there until a PARAMEDIC tells you to get off him. derek chauvin and those other shitheads are right where they belong: in prison.
I'm just wondering in what world Chauvin thought he could win an appeal. He murdered a man on camera. It doesn't get much more cut and dry.
If he merely faked concern at any point and time during the filmed incident, he could have something to point at. Bystanders were adamant throughout the length of the filmed encounter that they were killing Floyd. The pleas went unanswered until Floyd died.
All he had to do was get off of him and put him in the back of the patrol car, at a minimum.
It's crazy to me people defend that murderer.
Especially after the trail, when the weight of evidence became overwhelming.
People going to stick with their narratives though I guess.
They point to him being high at the time and that somehow justified the murder in their mind.
Kill someone your average Republican also wants to kill and they'll twist themselves in any ways necessary to justify and defend it.
But then the whiny bystanders would have won. He couldn't look like he was craving to the pressure of the plebs. He was the one in charge /s
I remember right after it happened conservatives were all saying that they condemned his actions. Later they changed their minds and decided he did nothing wrong, but the fact that even they saw how bad it was speaks volumes.
It's funny how many conservatives acknowledge reality, and soon collectively forget it after exposure to right-wing "news"...
Watch how it'll spin the most recent Elon shit to get an example first hand.
All the cops learned from that incident was that they probably need to start blocking or shooting the people holding the cameras.
Cops murder people on camera all the time. Him going to prison is genuinely anomalous.
Yeah the pigs who killed Elijah McClain will never see a day in prison. He’s probably thinking “why me?”
EDIT: the answer to that question by the way, is that Chauvin was a sacrificial lamb to create the illusion of justice and prevent further civil unrest during the height of the BLM movement.
EDIT 2: I was misinformed about Elijah’s case. One officer was convicted, one was acquitted. The paramedics are still awaiting trial.
it will forever amaze me that daniel shaver’s killer never faced any consequences
Fuck cops
What do you mean? He has to live with the mental trauma that his own actions caused. Guy can’t even stomach to go to his own workplace and use his gun that says “you’re fucked” in it anymore! If you ask me, Shaver got off easy for what he made that poor officer do. I’m glad he gets his pension and disability payments. God bless America!!!!
Heavy /s, just in case
He almost DID get away with it. Had there been slightly fewer clear camera angles, he was safe.
As long as at least one security, dash or bodycam could offer an 'alternative facts' version at any one angle that wasn't already uploaded everywhere, the typical "YOU didn't see the REAL angle" would have succeeded in supporting the tide of "it was drugs" and "if you look carefully he could be construed as possibly resisting in this frame".
- The department and bootlickers all over social media were themselves trying to taint the jury pool, excreting as they do every time an innocent gets killed, with some standard-media falling for the "read this department press release as if it was discovered facts" as well for a while there.
He'd gotten away with it before, and he had been explicitly promoted and chosen to train the next generation in exactly what he did to Floyd that day. One of the rookies was even tasked, hand on gun, with keeping an eye on the crowd to ensure no one dared approach to save his life. We were lucky it was in bright daylight with not enough cops in total to prevent the full disgusting footage of the man's final moments at the knees the rampaging marauder gang.
Absolutely, this was one of the most cut and dry cases of extrajudicial murder ever made clear to the public from every angle, and he still almost got away with it. And while I’m not going to say absolutely nothing has improved since then (some places have ended qualified immunity and established alternative de-escalation specialist groups), cops are still killing innocent people and getting away with it most of the time.
It’s fucked up it took such a moment where the planets aligned for responsibility to finally be taken.
Moderator removed comment
14d
Because the language of the unheard worked
You miss 100% of the shots you don’t take??
This is actually it. When you’re facing effectively life in prison, even if it’s a 0.01% chance, you take it. Not like you have anything else to spend your money on besides lawyers trying to get you out of prison.
Yeah, he's a piece of shit who deserves (and will!) to rot in prison but I'm not gonna fault him for trying to appeal.
The look of incomprehension in his eyes when the guilty verdict was first handed down was something else.
His lawyer is legally obligated to do everything in his power to defend his client, this is literally just standard operating procedure in a criminal case.
in what world Chauvin thought he could win an appeal
the fantasy world of /conservative
Twenty two years is a pretty short sentence for murdering someone under the color of authority.
There's a cop who killed a pedestrian by not paying attention while making a left-hand turn. That cop got a $35 "failure to yield" ticket.
Zach Wester got 12.5 years for planting evidence on multiple innocent people.
20 years ago, a cop who put 46 innocent people in prison on false drug charges got 10 years probation for aggravated perjury.
The American Justice system operates without rhyme or reason.
Fuck Chauvin. Anyone who watched the video saw him straight up murdering Floyd while others tried to stop him, while others called him out for doing it. He then abused his power to still kill a man trying to plead for his life. This isn't a grey area case with room for debate. He's just a piece of shit who should face the consequences of his actions.
I also feel it's necessary to remind people when these conversations arise that George Floyd wasn't even the first person that Derek Chauvin had killed.
That fact, when combined with Chauvin's many excessive force complaints and numerous counts of tax fraud/evasion, really paints a picture of a violent sociopath who saw himself as above the law.
Yeah. What was really shocking to me wasn't just that a police officer was killing someone helpless - we've seen that before. It was the sheer gall, lack of empathy, and sickening joy in the power he had.
He knew what he was doing, knew people couldn't stop him, and seemed to literally enjoy that feeling... to the point he didn't seem to mentally process how society as a whole would see the video later. He just reveled in the absolute control he had in that moment, getting off from the power over life and death and the ability to keep others from saving Floyd.
The look on his face was nothing new at all unfortunately. Not for him, not for any other cop.
The difference was that we don't often get to see it. Bodycams point away, security footage from above tends not to catch it well... so you never see the psychotic sneer or orgasm-like power-trip the victim is subjected to as their life is taken from them.
- Even when there's footage of their face, that doesn't get distributed because it would hurt the department's version of events.
But even if it's rare we see it, we DO once in a while hear that attitude: such as when audio comes out of the cops mocking a victim as they bleed out, or joking around in full confidence that no matter who hears they'll never be held accountable for simply letting someone die that shouldn't have.
User deleted comment
14d
Even more insulting to me: He was responsible for training new officers.
Like getting empathy training from Stalin.
How did this asshole get all the way to the Supreme Court?
That's how appeals work. You keep going up the chain until you get to the highest court in the land. If this was you and you were actually innocent you'd be happy it can keep going.
How about not killing people in the first place?
Nahhhh, that sounds way too difficult.
He's where he belongs. More killer cops should be too.
Dude. Get comfortable in prison.
He is the definition of a bad cop that gives the good and great cops a bad name. The Supreme Court courts agreed he is a racist piece of shit and needs to stay where his current residence is located, state prison.
When you’re too racist for a majority super-conservative Supreme Court
He's getting the full works, which he should. What pisses me off is that they've decided to only make an example of him, and not all the other pieces of shit who got away with murdering innocent men and women.
Saved you one click. summary of the article
• Supreme Court rejects appeal by former officer Derek Chauvin, upholding his conviction for George Floyd’s killing in May 2020.
• Chauvin’s appeal centered on the denial of a change of venue and jury sequestration, alleging a compromised fair trial due to pretrial publicity and potential violence.
• Chauvin was convicted in April 2021 on charges of second-degree murder, third-degree murder, and second-degree manslaughter, receiving a 22 ½-year sentence.
• The Minnesota Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction in April, and the state supreme court declined to review it in July.
• Chauvin also pleaded guilty to federal civil rights charges in December 2021, receiving a concurrent 21-year federal prison sentence.
• Currently seeking to overturn his federal conviction, arguing he wouldn’t have pleaded guilty if aware of alternative theories on Floyd’s cause of death.
——-
Quote from his lawyer: