Minnesota vs Chauvin

It is very finely balanced only because it takes only one juror to express a reasonable doubt, for whatever reason, about the overwhelming visual evidence and medical analyses which the prosecution has submitted. Chauvin has had as fair a trial as someone who kept his knee on the neck of another person, handcuffed and lying on his chest and stomach, for over nine minutes, could possibly expect. It should be remembered that he has never, reportedly, expressed any remorse.

My estimation is that a second degree murder conviction is out of the question, as Chauvin clearly did not intend or plan to kill George Floyd, especially as bystanders were filming his every movement. Third degree murder seems to involve a "depraved indifference" to the fate of his victim, and that outcome would, in my opinion, be perfectly justified, but is, sadly, unlikely. The most likely verdict is the manslaughter charge, as the defence has really put forward little or no real evidence, instead relying on a variety of random opinions aimed at confusing the jury in order to create the required reasonable doubt. That is where the atmosphere of a circus has arisen.

I do not contest the principle of innocent until proven guilty, far from it, but for the first time in such a case video evidence of the defendant's actions has been available from start to finish, and it is compelling above any other conclusions such as a drug overdose, carbon monoxide poisoning or heart attack. George Floyd's death was slow and torturous, and I am almost brought to tears every time I see it.

What I would like is some context about the situation in the US regarding the shooting of black\non-white suspects. For instance how many white people are killed by police officers and how many people of any ethnicity are killed by black and non-white cops.

This is just for posterity. Hopefully the jury will not have overlooked the expression on Chauvin's face....

What more evidence could you want than this video, and Chauvin's facial expressions and demeanour are amply demonstrated. All of the other evidence consists of opinions, on both sides, from medical experts who have expressed views based on their own particular fields of expertise. It's really all theory, although the detailed analysis presented by Dr Tobin is by far the most compelling. In simple terms, he believes that the breath was forced out of George Floyd by the knee on the neck.

Take a look at the video, just at around 2 minutes 40. I'm not talking about his eyes being too close together, that is nonsense, but in that moment Chauvin's face exhibits, for me, callous indifference, and actually shortly after that he lifts his foot off the road twice in order to exert further pressure. I believe that his intent is only marginally less important than the cause of death, and my view is that his intent was to cause as much harm and discomfort as possible. I don't believe, however, that he meant to kill George Floyd with so many witnesses present.

Can't agree mate, sorry. Of course people watched the video and drew their own conclusions, because the truth was staring them in the face. Without this visual evidence, it would have been impossible for anyone to make a clear verbal report on just how horrific the events were. Chauvin himself could have come up with all manner of excuses to justify the extent of what he did. No wonder the "voir dire" had to go through about 130 potential jurors to find just 15.

Although I have said all through this thread that I do agree entirely with the concept of "innocent until proven guilty", in this case I find rather distressing the possibility that this man has even a remote chance to get away it.

Brilliant closing argument by Steve Schleicher, Eric Nelson looking more and more uncomfortable. Meanwhile Chauvin still sits there calmly writing notes as though he is nothing more than a court reporter.