Derek Chauvin Trial: Watch It For Yourself

Andrew Donaldson

Born and raised in West Virginia, Andrew has been the Managing Editor of Ordinary Times since 2018, is a widely published opinion writer, and appears in media, radio, and occasionally as a talking head on TV. He can usually be found misspelling/misusing words on Twitter@four4thefire. Andrew is the host of Heard Tell podcast. Subscribe to Andrew'sHeard Tell Substack for free here:

Related Post Roulette

13 Responses

  1. Jaybird says:

    NPR has an article on the makeup of the jury.

    The jury chosen for the trial of former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin, charged with murder in the death of George Floyd, is notable because it is significantly less white than Minneapolis itself.

    Among the 12 jurors and three alternates selected for the panel are three Black men, one Black woman and two jurors who identify as multiracial. If none of the three alternates — all of them white — is needed in the deliberation room, 50% of the panel that will vote on Chauvin’s fate will be Black or multiracial.

    If I were going to be as cynical as I possibly could, my expectation would be that the play is to go for a big high-profile GUILTY! for the first trial, then go for an acquittal on the appeal.Report

  2. Jaybird says:

    Legal Insurrection has a Day-7 Wrap Up and their take is that the prosecution had a bad day.

    I am not a lawyer.
    But.

    This part right here has me saying “yeah… the prosecution had a bad day”:

    Even worse, not only did the cross-examination of MacKenzie by the defense also go badly for the prosecution, it went so badly that Nelson informed the court that he intended to re-call MacKenzie as a defense witness when he presented his case in chief.

    (Emphasis in original.)Report

    • Oscar Gordon in reply to Jaybird says:

      Gotta wonder if the prosecutor is taking one for the team…Report

      • Jaybird in reply to Oscar Gordon says:

        You can’t rule it out:

        Report

        • Jaybird in reply to Jaybird says:

          But maybe all that doesn’t matter:

          Report

          • DensityDuck in reply to Jaybird says:

            I mean…yeah the defense is saying “but he had fentanyl, he admitted he was high, he said that right in front of the police” and it seems to me like the prosecution response is “that makes it even more an act of knowing and intentional deadly assault, that they took someone in medical distress and put him in a position of further distress instead of rendering medical assistance”.Report

            • DensityDuck in reply to DensityDuck says:

              I mean, “he was gonna die anyway” is not a defense against a murder charge, because technically it’s true of everybodyReport

              • CJColucci in reply to DensityDuck says:

                Exactly. And when the defense expert takes the stand, he will have to answer a question more or less like the following: “Dr. X, is it your testimony that George Floyd would have died if he had been left lying on the ground in cuffs for nine minutes without Derek Chauvin’s knee on his neck?” If he says “No,” that’s game, set, and match. If he says “Yes,” he won’t be believed. Anything else is a wash.Report

    • Mike Schilling in reply to Jaybird says:

      Legal Insurrection is the Judge Judy of the legal webosphere.Report

      • Jaybird in reply to Mike Schilling says:

        They did a better job on the Oberlin stuff than anybody else.

        Now maybe there’s a list of names that I should be reading on the trial in addition to these guys and I’d love to see that list.

        But they built up enough good will with me for their Oberlin coverage to see their stuff as worth reading before dismissing it out of hand.Report

  3. Jaybird says:

    The first time the NYT sent this tweet out, they spelled it “trail”.

    Report