Chauvin Trial Verdict: GUILTY ON ALL COUNTS!

More to follow, doing a 8PM ET webinar Q&A over at Legal Insurrection tomorrow evening, if you’d like to join us there.

UPDATE! Derek Chauvin Post-Trial Analysis LIVE, 8PM EDT, April 21!

Tonight, Wednesday, April 21, at 8pm EDT, I’ll be joining Professor William Jacobson of Legal Insurrection to do a LIVE post-trial analysis of the Chauvin trial, verdict, and surrounding circumstances.

You are welcome to join the live event as well as participate in the live Q&A. Alternatively, you can also catch a recording later if the timing doesn’t work for you.

Either options requires a free registration, which you can do by clicking the image or link below:

I hope to see a bunch of you there!


42 thoughts on “Chauvin Trial Verdict: GUILTY ON ALL COUNTS!”

  1. 10 hours and zero questions to a case this complex? I can only imagine the jury’s deliberations were close to “everyone for conviction say ‘guilty’ and everyone else say ‘I want to be murdered in my home.'”

    What an abhorrent miscarriage of justice. Lets hope the appeals court has the bravery that Judge Cahill lacks.

    1. There are three juries of national repute, the members of which should go down in history as disgusting human beings, unworthy of anything but a lifetime of contempt and ridicule, and banishment. It is one thing to let one’s emotions taint a verdict but it is reprehensible that when the rest of a man’s life is stake that the jury doesn’t take the time to carefully consider the evidence for each charge.

      The Juries of Infamy:

      Rodney King’s first jury.
      OJ Simpson’s first Criminal Trial Jury
      Derick Chauvin’s first Jury.


    2. They probably voted unanimously from the get go, but then decided “let’s make it look like we are actually deliberating” and watched “12 angry men” on Netflix.

    3. Exactly! If it were only before the judge, I believe he would have convicted him out to fear for his and his family’s lives. Mob rule in MN is now official! President Trump called for peacefully making your voice heard, they called for impeachment. Maxine Waters calls for “confrontation” if the verdict the DEMAND is not given, which is really an incitement of violence. That is acceptable.

    4. CP,

      This whole case makes me sick to my stomach. Candace Owens just said Floyd had done SEVEN stretches in state pens. He killed himself with his fentanyl ingestion. Chauvin was not just trying to enforce the law, he was actually trying to help Floyd. This is his reward. I doubt there is a police officer in the United States who is not having a very serious conversation with himself about what happens the next time he has to deal with a nonwhite perp. God help the decent people of Minnesota, because after this the police almost certainly won’t.

      I am not certain I can think of anything more calculated than this case to turn anyone nonblack into an anti-black racist.

  2. I’m SHOCKED, but yet not surprised, if that makes sense. Not only was there reasonable doubt, there was overwhelming evidence that Chauvin did NOT do anything unlawful and that Floyd likely OD’d on drugs among other health problems. There is no way he got a fair trial. If I was on the Jury I would feel threatened and like my life and my familes life was in danger if I voted the wrong way. That’s the only way this makes any sense is if they were intimidated into a guilty verdict. We all know some the mob would come burn their houses down.

  3. We, the observers of the trial, have the luxury to watch and replay testimonies, read commentary by defense lawyers, discuss etc. The Jury, on the other hand, listens to all that in a very linear fashion.

    It can’t help that, even purely by ratio, prosecution spent more than 3x time presenting its case. The fact that closing statements are finalized by prosecution’s rebuttal (I somehow thought the defense has the last say). Ultimately, the main aspect that affected this whole thing (beyond rioting and intimidation) is that Baker qualified it as homicide. Nobody cares about legal vs CDC definitions. This is too powerful medical verdict that got conflated with legal and emerged as final decision by the Jury.

    1. I was also surprised. For a system that is supposed to be based on presumptive innocence you would think the defense would at least have the last word.

  4. I was a beat cop in Honolulu for a few years.
    I will be very interested to see how the Joe Beat Cops on the street will react to this verdict. If I was a member of MPD, I would have turned in my shield already.
    I couldn’t abide being subject to a system where everyone is against me and ready to throw me to the wolves.

      1. Andrew,

        With all due regard, you assume facts not in evidence, i.e., that after this MPD will actually end up with ANY cops six months from now. I can’t imagine anyone on that force not spending all day, every day, desperately looking for alternative employment from now until the search is successful.

    1. I live in the City of Saint Louis. Many cities are now going to experience what we have had since Ferguson in 14.
      The police are “there”, you see them in the cars. But not much is done anymore. They put the tape up and move about at the most violent crime scenes-but is has the of law enforcement theater. No crimes are really prosecuted anymore anyway. Why should they takes risks? They won’t even show up to a property crime call. And shots fired calls will get a cruiser drive by perhaps within a half hour. No certainty. 911 has had 9 minutes on hold recently.
      In a discussion of neighborhood crime, I had a Lt. tell me that we were on our own. I have known this for a long time, but his candor in public was a bit of a surprise.
      This is coming to all major cities, some sooner than others. Chicago, Baltimore, and Philly are well down this road. It really is not that hard living in the jungle when you know that is where you live.

      I think this trial has shown very clearly how a miseducated, media besotted population has destroyed whatever little credibility the jury system had left.

  5. I afraid this would happen. If I was in law enforcement, I would seriously consider another line of work. You risk being killed every day. If a minority criminal dies during a physical confrontation, you will lose your job, be financially ruined, and possibly spend the rest of your life in jail.

  6. Guilty of third degree murder and the prosecution didn’t even present any evidence on one of the essential elements of that offense. Just goes to show how little the jury knew about whether or not the prosecution proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt. It was plain error for the court to even instruct on a charge where there was no evidence to support an essential element of the charge.

  7. I agree the inevitable unintended consequences will begin to surface relatively soon. How many potential new officers around the country will withdraw their applications and how many more will be turning in their shields. If they have any retirement or benefits accrued during years on the job, they’ll begin the exit plans I would think they started last summer.

        1. I donated to “Kystie’s Best Defense” which was for the civil defense of Kystie Jaehnen who fired a single round, which stopped the perp, in defense of a police officer whom was being assaulted and under risk of death or great bodily harm. The perp (of course) was under the influence of …. In any event, the site is no longer accepting donations for her defense, and to find out why, you have to have been the campaign initiator and log in. In other words, the campaign didn’t end normally. So, you may all be right. And, how do we help?

        2. This is something that really disgusts me. Kim Potter may very well be guilty of manslaughter (which I think is highly likely), but even the worst of us deserve a Defense, and have the right to seek help from others to mount that Defense!

          1. IDK.
            The kid purposely hid the ditching of the gun and turned as he raised his hands.
            What are the odds you or I or most anyone would have recognized he didn’t still have the gun and was not moving to fire it before shooting him?

            I bet he would be alive today if he had raised his hands and paused a second before turning around.

  8. The Empowered Life

    This verdict would be easier to swallow if I could confidently say it was reached without intimidation. To have to reach a particular verdict or else fear what might happen to you or your familiar is in no way justice. Minus intimidation, I would disagree with the guilty verdict based on the facts, but I would not doubt it was reached lawfully (minus foundational issues with the prosecution the judge failed to confront) .

    As it stands, with all the officials commenting on opinions and crowds screaming outside the courthouse (could the jury possibly hear that?), it seems the only way justice can be served is to overturn the conviction, regardless of evidence, as there is no possible way for a jury to not be prejudiced. A verdict should not be reached by threats. Even if I agreed with a guilty verdict, I would not be okay with this outcome knowing justice was co-opted by fear.

  9. The Empowered Life

    The public should be able to trust “beyond a reasonable doubt” that a verdict was reached fairly and lawfully. So many reasons/facts exist demonstrating that this verdict should be doubted due to potential interference with the neutrality of the jury.

  10. guilty as charged

    My prayers are for Derik and his family. I imagine all the other fellow officers are taking plea bargains in the next few days.
    This case was never about justice, but about common sense. You can do everything by the book and still get convicted. To hell with police protocol. How is this going to look on national TV? This isn’t a lawyer in the world that can errase the video. Black lives do matter. It’s the community that gives police it’s power to do it’s job. Qualified immunity works and is required for policing, but when something is so outrageous, there’s no immunity for that. Times are bad for the police profession. May God protect them all and keep them safe. For us use of force students, you have to think long and hard about the times you’re willing to use force on another human being.

    1. The following article is an interesting perspective on it all. It starts talking about protecting a business but goes further.

      Problem is, ‘let it burn’ is substantially different than let them kill ya.

      Fortunately, the riot gods seem, at least temporarily, appeased.

      My wife said “Why can’t they just shoot them in the leg?” In response the the girl shot just before the Chauvin verdict. She doesn’t want to learn about the issues and factors involved. Just the optics please. People often get a different perspective when they are attacked or a family member is harmed.

      The ‘She was just a kid.’ Sad, true. Heartbreaking even. Yet irrelevant except in the eyes of those ruled by emotion.

      ‘It was just a knife’ … smh
      ‘Shoot her in the leg’ … oi

  11. The Empowered Life

    Agreed on the use of force being a weighty issue. I think that’s why we are all students of it here, because we don’t want to get it wrong if the unfortunate instance occurs when we might have to use force to defend ourselves. But if it was the case that this was merely an instance of common sense being at stake, wouldn’t it make more sense to let the jury come to that verdict on the merits of the case, without using threats of force to interfere with the outcome? Why taint the outcome if it is that simple?

    1. guilty as charged

      I agree completely. In a fair world but our’s is not. Lady Justice’s blindfold didn’t work very well when there’s a torch on here leg. If you were on the jury, would you have voted differently? Do you have family? Are you going to move away and change your name? After everyone has gone home, maybe Derick’s appeal with find a new trial with a untainted jury in a couple of years. A white policeman with his knee on a black man who dies…that’s iconic and a tragedy. It will probably never fade away. I’m sure Derick is wishing he had done that differently. In a sense, Floyd’s death is like the death of a child. In custody is a life in your hands. The distractions, drugs in his system and a precarious physical condition are things the policeman has to deal with. That’s his job.

    2. TEL,

      Simple reason. The ‘Rats based much of their election theft campaign on the supposed violence and brutality visited on Floyd. WE KNOW it didn’t happen that way, but most of the “great unwashed” don’t. The ‘Rats want to keep it that way. They HAD to have a guilty verdict here, otherwise all the burning, looting and mayhem would be shown as having been committed because of a lie. So, just as they did in stealing the election, they pulled out all the stops. They didn’t give a damn that this trial was as dishonestly corrupt as that of Emmitt Till. They HAD to have a conviction, and they did everything they could, including threatening the jury, to procure it. They, like Dominion Voting Machines VP Eric Coomer, were not going to leave anything to chance.

  12. Attorney Andrew Branca

    UPDATE! Derek Chauvin Post-Trial Analysis LIVE, 8PM EDT, April 21!

    Tonight, Wednesday, April 21, at 8pm EDT, I’ll be joining Professor William Jacobson of Legal Insurrection to do a LIVE post-trial analysis of the Chauvin trial, verdict, and surrounding circumstances.

    You are welcome to join the live event as well as participate in the live Q&A. Alternatively, you can also catch a recording later if the timing doesn’t work for you.

    Either options requires a free registration, which you can do by clicking the link below:

    I hope to see a bunch of you there!

  13. QUESTION: Did the Prosecution get some autopsy or toxicology evidence excluded from the trial? I have in mind Dr. Baker’s comments that George Floyd’s lungs showed pulmonary edema (three times their normal weight because they were filled with fluid) and that in other circumstances the level of fentanyl in Floyd’s body would have been sufficient to rule that he had died of a drug overdose. (Official Memorandum written by Amy Sweasy on comments made by Dr. Baker.) It seems clear that Floyd died from pulmonary edema: Well before he (at his own request) was put on the ground, he was crying out in agony, “I can’t breathe! … I’m gonna die! … I can’t breathe!” He couldn’t breathe, because his lungs were filling with fluid. Floyd was in “excited delirium”, a dying man before he was down on the ground. And there were other aggravating factors: his very severe heart problems and the stress of the circumstances, which were Floyd’s fault for being violently non-compliant. If the real cause of Floyd’s death was excluded from the trial, then this ought to be a ground for appeal.

    1. I think the evidence of fluid in the lungs was admitted in the form of an exhibit, but I don’t think either the prosecution’s or the defense’s medical experts ever presented it to the jury in the form of testimony, and I don’t know if the jury was provided with a copy of the exhibit to read for themselves. I didn’t follow all the testimony closely enough to say for sure. I think failure of the defense to stress this evidence repeatedly was a pretty big mistake.

      The issue on “causes the death” is basically would George Floyd have lived one minute or even seconds longer but for Chauvin’s physical restraint of him. It would be hard for the prosecution to introduce evidence sufficient to prove (to me at least) beyond a reasonable doubt that he would have, and the defense actually did not have to prove that he would not have. Of course if the defendant could have proved that he would not have lived any longer that would have been good for the defense, but again, really no way for the defense to introduce even a scintilla of evidence that he would have.

  14. ANOTHER QUESTION: Were the jury ever shown the 24-minute George Parry video, either in whole or in part? That video effectively showed what happened before George Floyd was put on the ground: A hysterical Floyd, violently thrashing around and resisting orders of the cops, and saying over and over: “I can’t breathe! … I’m gonna die! … I can’t breathe!” At this point Floyd was a dying man. In that video George Parry effectively analyzes what happened. scene by scene, and he concludes that the cops did nothing wrong and that Floyd died of a drug overdose. The George Parry video shows part of the official Memorandum written by Amy Sweasy, describing what Dr. Baker said before the Prosecution/Establishment got to him — that Floyd’s lungs were filled with fluid and that under any other circumstances his death would be ruled a drug overdose. Was this Memorandum introduced into evidence? Did the Prosecution block it? Here’s a link to the Memorandum:

  15. CNN Video supports many of the concerns that Andrew has about the jury and trial.
    Alternate juror reveals what convinced her of Chauvin’s guilt – Lisa Christensen, an alternate juror in Derek Chauvin’s trial, told reporters that Dr. Martin Tobin, the doctor who explained how George Floyd died, convinced her of the former police officer’s guilt.

Leave a Comment