Summary of Week One of the Derek Chauvin Murder Trial скачать в хорошем качестве

Summary of Week One of the Derek Chauvin Murder Trial

Office Address: Law Office of David P. Shapiro 3500 5th Avenue Suite 304 San Diego, CA 92103 619-295-3555 https://www.davidpshapirolaw.com/ Hi, my name is David P. Shapiro. I want to talk to you about what's going on in Minneapolis right now. It is March of 2021, and the George Floyd case, and I'm hesitant to even say the George Floyd case because George Floyd's not on trial, Derek Chauvin is. But it's known as the George Floyd case. Derek Chauvin's trial is underway in Minneapolis. Jury selection started the week of March the 8th. And over the next couple of weeks, as we get into the spring, this trial will be watched by many, many, many people in this country, many, many people around the world. And something that we're doing in our firm here is trying to keep up to date on what's happening day in day out. One, because we're fascinated by it. The uniqueness of this case, which I'll talk about in a second. And also because we're frequently called upon for input. What does a criminal defense attorney think about this? What does an experienced firm like ours think about these cases that are garnering national attention, of worldwide attention? So, what's really unique about this case, far more unique than the fact that it is a cop or a former cop, disgraced cop, in the defense chair. It's the fact that we're dealing with a prosecutor for the most part, they're private prosecutors, they're defense attorneys. They're working in big firms, brought in under the umbrella of the Attorney General's office in Minnesota to prosecute the case. There's also the unique factor that the state's own medical examiner, their testimony is likely not to be very favorable when it comes time to whether a jury will convict Derek Chauvin of second degree murder. Because of all these things, all these things that we're going to hear about known as superseding causes, that could have basically led up to or could have been a main factor in George Floyd's death. Things like possible fentanyl ingestion. Was he under the influence of a controlled substance? Did he have obviously a pre-existing heart condition? We know that he previously was diagnosed with COVID and there's been some talk about whether or not he had the presence of some sickle cells, which obviously could have affected his health as well. So all of those factors, which the state's own medical expert talked about as possible superseding causes of Mr. Floyd's death, will factor into the second degree murder charge, and whether or not a jury believes the only reasonable interpretation of the evidence is that Derek Chauvin was responsible for the second degree murder of George Floyd. On the opposite end of the spectrum, it's second degree manslaughter, Minnesota. Significantly, significantly less penalty, a maximum of 10 years. But requires a whole lot less. So you look at, was Chauvin's actions reckless? Of course they were. We saw that on the video, the way that he's got his sunglasses on top of his head. There's really not much of a struggle for the majority, if not all of those eight plus minutes, when he has his knee on George Floyd's back, and/or George Floyd's neck. And then you look at, he's got one hand in the pocket, he's staring at the camera. And the other officer's actions are important here as well. When they say, "Hey should we get him on his side?" So this idea that he didn't know that this was a dangerous act, that this could have led to death, or great bodily injury is going to be very, very, very, very difficult for the defense to overcome. Now, what we also have somewhere in the middle, although probably closer to secondary murder, is third degree murder in Minnesota. Kind of unique. We don't have that in California as far as a third degree murder charge. But now the third degree murder is back in play. And that could result in a sentence of up to 25 years. Second degree would be up to 40 years. And what we're dealing with and what we're assessing over the next weeks and months, we're going to be on top of it. We're going to try and get as much information out to everybody that follows us on social media and get the word out there. So the public is informed, because there are two real types of justice, right? There's justice in a courtroom and there's social justice. And the concern that we have is that what may play out, applying the facts that a jury hears, not all the facts, but the facts that are allowed in a courtroom that a jury hears may result in a lesser verdict than what, socially, what a lot of people think is the appropriate verdict. So it's going to be a tough call. I think when we get down to third degree murder, when a jury makes that assessment, we're very early in the process, but we look forward to this case, which is in many ways going to be a groundbreaking case that'll be a part of this country's fabric for decades to come.