Derek Chauvin Trial: Closing Arguments Live Stream and Discussion

Andrew Donaldson

Born and raised in West Virginia, Andrew has since lived and traveled around the world several times over. Though frequently writing about politics out of a sense of duty and love of country, most of the time he would prefer discussions on history, culture, occasionally nerding on aviation, and his amateur foodie tendencies. He can usually be found misspelling/misusing words on Twitter @four4thefire and his writing website Yonder and Home. Andrew is the host of Heard Tell podcast.

Related Post Roulette

10 Responses

  1. Chip Daniels says:

    As we wait for a verdict, keep in mind the comments about Afro-pessimism, and whether it is warranted.

    I hope not. But I fear it may be.Report

  2. Jaybird says:

    Saw a lot of takes that explained that the Defense had good days.

    Saw a lot of takes that explained that the Prosecution hit it out of the park.

    I suspect that we’ll return to the concept of “Mens Rea” when it comes to this sort of thing. (Pity that we only trot that out when one of the authorities is on trial.)Report

    • Oscar Gordon in reply to Jaybird says:

      This is an interesting point, and I have to wonder why it’s not a valid defense when a citizen is on trial for an unintentional crossing of the law? I mean, that’s the whole problem with QI, isn’t it?Report

      • Jaybird in reply to Oscar Gordon says:

        For what it’s worth (and I’m sure you’re not surprised), *I* think that “mens rea” is hugely important for citizens and should pretty much enter into it at the same level that the cops get it.

        I think that prosecutors don’t emphasize it with citizens is that it lets too many off the hook.

        And I think that the reason that prosecutors emphasize it with law enforcement is that it lets too many off the hook.Report

    • Kazzy in reply to Jaybird says:

      It seems possible that both things are true: the prosecution did well and the defense did well. I didn’t follow the particulars of the trial but I generally think we need avoid assuming that the outcome directly correlates to the quality of the effort put forth by each side.Report

      • Jaybird in reply to Kazzy says:

        I just googled “Reasonable Doubt”.

        The first entry is to

        Here we go:

        (this is copied/pasted from Google, not even clicking through… emphasis in original.)

        A standard of proof that must be surpassed to convict an accused in a criminal proceeding. Reasonable doubt is a standard of proof used in criminal trials. When a criminal defendant is prosecuted, the prosecutor must prove the defendant’s guilt Beyond a Reasonable Doubt.

        I haven’t followed the trial closely enough to know whether I think that 2nd Degree is a shoo-in or that it’s more likely to end up being 3rd Degree.

        If I wanted to shoot from the hip, I’d say that 3rd Degree is the charge that the state keeps in their back pocket for police officers who kill someone particularly egregiously in the course of doing their job and so that seems like the most likely outcome to me in a vacuum.

        But we are not in a vacuum.

        So… all that to say, I’m not saying that the quality of the effort is required to find guilty or to acquit. I’m saying that the quality of the effort probably speaks to how big the window of “Reasonable Doubt” is.

        And, for some reason, doubts become a lot more reasonable when we’re talking about cops than when we’re talking about non-cops.Report

  3. Saul Degraw says:

    I think it will probably take a while for us to have a verdict. The cynic in me states that the shorter deliberations are likely to mean acquittal. There is a reasonable chance of a hung jury. Perhaps the jury will find a compromise verdict on a really lesser charge.

    In terms of public reaction, I expect one for anything less the most severe possibility. Maybe even then.Report

  4. Jaybird says:

    Okay. They’re coming back early.

    The general consensus is that a fast jury is a convicting jury.Report

  5. Jaybird says:

    Huh. Guilty on all of the big ones.