Derek Chauvin trial: The murder of George Floyd

[Slim Cognito]

I resemble that remark. I grew up in the midwest.

[filly]

I never get too optimistic about any trial until the verdict is in. I know that there is great emotional investment in this case, but caution that anything can happen with a jury.

[Maybenaut]

I never get too optimistic about any trial until the verdict is in. I know that there is great emotional investment in this case, but caution that anything can happen with a jury.

:yeah:

[W. Kevin Vicklund]

Dr. Thomas is absolutely adorable.

Also, is it a Minnesota thing to start sentences with "So" all the time? I've noticed several of the witnesses who do that.

So, that's a midwest thing. I do it all the time.

[LM K]

I never get too optimistic about any trial until the verdict is in. I know that there is great emotional investment in this case, but caution that anything can happen with a jury.

I absolutely agree. And convicting an officer is extremely hard.

[sterngard friegen]

I never get too optimistic about any trial until the verdict is in. I know that there is great emotional investment in this case, but caution that anything can happen with a jury.

O'rly?

OJ!

[sugar magnolia]

Odd thing today due to my inability to watch commercials. I was watching CNN and Shaq Whosit did the pool report. He said the report was that the jurors were taking notes during the prosecution direct, but the only one who bothered during the cross was the same one who took notes all the time anyway. A commercial came on so I flipped over to HLN, where Jean Casarez said she had pool notes and then said the only note taking came during the cross.

Aren't the "pool notes" from 2 reporters who are actually in the court room? Any idea why they might be completely different? And they also noted that Chauvin has a family member in court today but she hasn't been identified and Nelson wouldn't allow either of the reporters to approach her.

[sugar magnolia]

I never get too optimistic about any trial until the verdict is in. I know that there is great emotional investment in this case, but caution that anything can happen with a jury.

O'rly?

OJ!

Yep. My first thought every time I get too excited.
I can't imagine how tight ass holes in Minneapolis are right now waiting for the verdict, regardless of what it is. "So tight you couldn't hammer a straight pin in with a 5 lb sledge" as my dad would say.

[LM K]

I never get too optimistic about any trial until the verdict is in. I know that there is great emotional investment in this case, but caution that anything can happen with a jury.

O'rly?

OJ!

I was in grad school when the OJ trial was underway. On the day of the verdict, I was on the bus going to campus. The bus was quite full and loud; this was back when people talked to each other rather than looking at tech in public. The driver was playing the trial on the speakers. When the not guilty verdict was announced, the entire bus went stone silent and then we just looked at each other is shock.

Bizarre experience. Extremely bizarre jury verdict.

[LM K]

Odd thing today due to my inability to watch commercials. I was watching CNN and Shaq Whosit did the pool report. He said the report was that the jurors were taking notes during the prosecution direct, but the only one who bothered during the cross was the same one who took notes all the time anyway. A commercial came on so I flipped over to HLN, where Jean Casarez said she had pool notes and then said the only note taking came during the cross.

Aren't the "pool notes" from 2 reporters who are actually in the court room? Any idea why they might be completely different? And they also noted that Chauvin has a family member in court today but she hasn't been identified and Nelson wouldn't allow either of the reporters to approach her.

That's a good thing, imo. Chauvin is on trial, not his family.

I think the presence of a family member indicates that Chauvin is freaking out after yesterday's damning testimony. Chauvin has had no family or friends in the courtroom until today.

[LM K]

The defense basically comes down to this: if Floyd had been healthier or wasn't on drugs, Floyd would still be alive. He would have survived 9.5 minutes of excessive force.

So, officers should be held accountable for excessive force injuries/deaths of only healthy people who don't use drugs or prescribed medications?

How dare George Floyd die!!

[sugar magnolia]

The defense basically comes down to this: if Floyd had been healthier or wasn't on drugs, Floyd would still be alive. He would have survived 9.5 minutes of excessive force.

So, officers should be held accountable for excessive force injuries/deaths of only healthy people who don't use drugs or prescribed medications?

How dare George Floyd die!!

Pretty much what I'm getting too, especially after the weird attempted questioning about the "but for" of the ME by the FBI or whoever they decided it was. I noticed the defense moved on as soon as the ME mentioned the follow-up letter to them from the Hennepin Co legal dept a couple of days later. I was really surprised he was only on the stand a total of 2 hours too.

I just realized today that I had 3 large pieces hanging in the building where the trial is being held too. An invitational after Katrina for MS artists. The woman who organized it came down at one point and I drove her around the coast for several days. Wish I remembered her name. All 3 pieces sold, including one to a college up there somewhere. Augsberg or something like that?

[RVInit]

Yeah. But Chauvin's actions also demonstrate that he would have continued sitting on top of Floyd for as long as it took. Had he been healthier it may have take 10 minutes before he succumbed. And Chauvin would have had to increase the torture time to 13-something minutes.

[humblescribe]

So, here we are two weeks into the trial.

Do the lawyers have jury observers on their team to see how the jury is reacting to direct and cross?

Do the lawyers keep a scorecard on each witness after direct and cross and award a score to see just how well the trial is going (or not going) for their side?

Will the defense offer up a motion to dismiss after the prosecution rests?

From my perspective, the defense lawyer just turns me off. I don't like excuse-making. I don't like edited evidence to elicit a coaxed response like, "Did you hear Mr. Floyd say, 'I ate too many drugs,' right?" I don't like leading questions, especially tagged with, "Agreed?" I am afraid that this lawyer has lost all credibility with me. He flails on cross of the direct testimony. Factor in his complete ignorance of key medical terminology and basic anatomy. If I were a defense lawyer, I would have hired a medical professional to learn the ABCs of the key testimony from the physicians called by the prosecution. At one point he did not know the difference between venous blood and arterial blood when Dr. Tobin was on cross, and the doctor had to correct him. I would assume that it is never a good strategy to have the witness correct the lawyer's statements. Defense counsel bores me.

Unless he can pull a rabbit out of a hat with his defense, I would convict Chauvin in a nanosecond.

[Maybenaut]

I never get too optimistic about any trial until the verdict is in. I know that there is great emotional investment in this case, but caution that anything can happen with a jury.

O'rly?

OJ!

I was in grad school when the OJ trial was underway. On the day of the verdict, I was on the bus going to campus. The bus was quite full and loud; this was back when people talked to each other rather than looking at tech in public. The driver was playing the trial on the speakers. When the not guilty verdict was announced, the entire bus went stone silent and then we just looked at each other is shock.

Bizarre experience. Extremely bizarre jury verdict.

My husband and I were on a plane from CA to Boston. We were going to visit our friends with whom we watched the slow-speed chase. The pilot announced the verdict over the PA. Stunned silence.

[Patagoniagirl]

So, here we are two weeks into the trial.

Do the lawyers have jury observers on their team to see how the jury is reacting to direct and cross?

Do the lawyers keep a scorecard on each witness after direct and cross and award a score to see just how well the trial is going (or not going) for their side?

Will the defense offer up a motion to dismiss after the prosecution rests?

From my perspective, the defense lawyer just turns me off. I don't like excuse-making. I don't like edited evidence to elicit a coaxed response like, "Did you hear Mr. Floyd say, 'I ate too many drugs,' right?" I don't like leading questions, especially tagged with, "Agreed?" I am afraid that this lawyer has lost all credibility with me. He flails on cross of the direct testimony. Factor in his complete ignorance of key medical terminology and basic anatomy. If I were a defense lawyer, I would have hired a medical professional to learn the ABCs of the key testimony from the physicians called by the prosecution. At one point he did not know the difference between venous blood and arterial blood when Dr. Tobin was on cross, and the doctor had to correct him. I would assume that it is never a good strategy to have the witness correct the lawyer's statements. Defense counsel bores me.

Unless he can pull a rabbit out of a hat with his defense, I would convict Chauvin in a nanosecond.

I agree Humble. There was something about the defense making statements in a way that he gets away with that bugs me.

And, while not a juror, I can't get past 9+ minutes.

[Maybenaut]

So, here we are two weeks into the trial.

Do the lawyers have jury observers on their team to see how the jury is reacting to direct and cross?

Do the lawyers keep a scorecard on each witness after direct and cross and award a score to see just how well the trial is going (or not going) for their side?

Will the defense offer up a motion to dismiss after the prosecution rests?

From my perspective, the defense lawyer just turns me off. I don't like excuse-making. I don't like edited evidence to elicit a coaxed response like, "Did you hear Mr. Floyd say, 'I ate too many drugs,' right?" I don't like leading questions, especially tagged with, "Agreed?" I am afraid that this lawyer has lost all credibility with me. He flails on cross of the direct testimony. Factor in his complete ignorance of key medical terminology and basic anatomy. If I were a defense lawyer, I would have hired a medical professional to learn the ABCs of the key testimony from the physicians called by the prosecution. At one point he did not know the difference between venous blood and arterial blood when Dr. Tobin was on cross, and the doctor had to correct him. I would assume that it is never a good strategy to have the witness correct the lawyer's statements. Defense counsel bores me.

Unless he can pull a rabbit out of a hat with his defense, I would convict Chauvin in a nanosecond.

I haven’t listened to any of this trial, but that’s generally how cross-examination works. The presumption is that the other side’s witness isn’t going to give you anything useful voluntarily, so you ask leading questions, the answer to which is either yes or no. You’ll see the prosecution doing the same thing with the defense case. But some lawyers are better at it than others, and can ask a leading question in a way that’s not off-putting to the jury.

[busterbunker]

I was in LA for the OJ verdict and some of us breathed a sigh of relief. It had only been a couple of years since the Rodney King riots. Things were still pretty tense. A lot of black folks were jubilant and many white folks couldn't understand that.

I'm concerned about protests morphing into riots this coming summer. Things are still pretty tense.

[RVInit]

I'm concerned now about that juror. Her mother texted her yesterday that "today was a bad day". That sounds like they are in the defense camp because yesterday was a seriously great day for the prosecution. The juror didn't text back, but her mother's statement makes me think they have talked about it and more than likely are on the same page. I think the prosecution is concerned about her and rightly so.

[filly]

I'm concerned now about that juror. Her mother texted her yesterday that "today was a bad day". That sounds like they are in the defense camp because yesterday was a seriously great day for the prosecution. The juror didn't text back, but her mother's statement makes me think they have talked about it and more than likely are on the same page. I think the prosecution is concerned about her and rightly so.

[Lani]

Can the juror be removed?

Is this still accurate?

What are 2 things a juror should never do?
(1) Tell the person it is improper for a juror to discuss the case or receive any information except in the courtroom. (2) Refuse to listen if the outsider persists. (3) Report the incident at once to the judge. Jurors have the duty to report to the judge any improper behavior by any juror.

HANDBOOK FOR TRIAL JURORS SERVING IN THE UNITED ...
https://www.uscourts.gov › file › download

[sad-cafe]

I'm watching Dr. Tobin's testimony. Some of the pics are new to me.

George Floyd was tortured to death.

Yes. I was blown away when the testimony and closeup photos of how Chauvin was squeezing Floyd's fingers together while pulling his hand backwards was shocking and sickening. This really was truly depraved behavior exhibited by Chauvin. I am cautiously hopeful that he may actually end up convicted.

I have learned way more than I knew. He was tortured by a guy who LOVED doing it


makes me f'n sick

[LM K]

The cross-exam of Dr. Baker, the county med examiner was quite effective. Some questions were beyond the scope of this specific med examiner, but that wasn't as clear as it could have been during cross examination. But the prosecution summed up the actual report very well on redirect.

I live streamed the trial on Washington Post. They had analysts during breaks. One made a brilliant observation; the jurors now have all weekend to reflect on the medical testimony. Every doctor had the same conclusion: Floyd died by homicide, not cardiac arrest or drug use. Cardiac arrest would be categorized as natural causes and drug overdose would be categorized as an accidental death (unless evidence points to suicide, which it did not in Floyd's case). Well, unless those were caused by homicide.

The family hired independent med examiners for an independent autopsy. I expect one or both of those med examiners will testify on Mon.

The prosecution is likely to close late Mon. I'm very curious to see the defense witnesses. I think it's going to be tough for the defense to overcome the prosecution's law enforcement testimony and medical testimony. I think their med experts will be much less effective than the prosecution's med experts. I'm not sure about law enforcement experts.

[sad-cafe]

So, here we are two weeks into the trial.

Do the lawyers have jury observers on their team to see how the jury is reacting to direct and cross?

Do the lawyers keep a scorecard on each witness after direct and cross and award a score to see just how well the trial is going (or not going) for their side?

Will the defense offer up a motion to dismiss after the prosecution rests?

From my perspective, the defense lawyer just turns me off. I don't like excuse-making. I don't like edited evidence to elicit a coaxed response like, "Did you hear Mr. Floyd say, 'I ate too many drugs,' right?" I don't like leading questions, especially tagged with, "Agreed?" I am afraid that this lawyer has lost all credibility with me. He flails on cross of the direct testimony. Factor in his complete ignorance of key medical terminology and basic anatomy. If I were a defense lawyer, I would have hired a medical professional to learn the ABCs of the key testimony from the physicians called by the prosecution. At one point he did not know the difference between venous blood and arterial blood when Dr. Tobin was on cross, and the doctor had to correct him. I would assume that it is never a good strategy to have the witness correct the lawyer's statements. Defense counsel bores me.

Unless he can pull a rabbit out of a hat with his defense, I would convict Chauvin in a nanosecond.

I hate the way he always rubs his nose -in addition to all that you mentioned as well. The "agreed" bugs the piss out of me. I feel like he is always trying to "catch" someone.

[sad-cafe]

I'm concerned now about that juror. Her mother texted her yesterday that "today was a bad day". That sounds like they are in the defense camp because yesterday was a seriously great day for the prosecution. The juror didn't text back, but her mother's statement makes me think they have talked about it and more than likely are on the same page. I think the prosecution is concerned about her and rightly so.

do the prosecution know this? Was this a media report?


Can that juror be dismissed and the alternate put in?