Understanding the Derek Chauvin Trial
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 16 июн 2024
- Professor Anne Coughlin leads a discussion of the legal landscape surrounding Derek Chauvin’s ongoing trial for the death of George Floyd. Coughlin outlines the charges against Chauvin and what they mean, where the case stands currently and what to expect moving forward in the coming weeks. This event was the first of a four-part series examining the trial, and was co-sponsored by UVA Law’s Center for Criminal Justice, UVA’s Frank Batten School of Leadership and Public Policy, and the UVA Police Department. (University of Virginia School of Law, April 7, 2021)
A balanced and objective tutorial on a live issue, an education for the lay person; non-USA resident. Thank you for sharing your intellect.
I’m a PhD student in engineering at UVa but I’ve been thinking about applying for law school after I finish. This made me want to go to UVA again!
Sicko, like killing American people????
What top 10 books should be read to prepare someone for law school?
thank u for the interesting explanations and for ur compassion, u r a beautiful person Anne Coughlin
Anne I doubt that you will see this comment but I would like to raise this question! Given that the police already had George Floyd in the back of the police car: Why did they forcibly drag him out of that advantageous position back out of the car to a less safe and restraining position!
Thank you from Tanzania Africa
I feel the state did an awesome job. Unfortunately all cases don’t get the same treatment, especially ones that aren’t televised.
Which are all of them basically 🤡
thank you, Anne. i´m watching the trial for 12 days now and your informations about "the american way of how justice works" explains nearly everything to me. i´m from germany and trial on court is completely different (in my opinion(i´m no lawyer)).
i hope, that in the end, the jury render a fair judgement.
You might clarify the difference between cause of death and manner of death.
The neck to shoulder restraint can be initiated for ages - absolutely ages!
risk and threat are two completely difference propositions..
In light of Graham vs Connor and the fact that Floyd was handcuffed and prone, surely the defence’s argument that Chauvin thought Floyd might start resisting again (and all the stuff about his height) becomes meaningless, as force being applied even after Floyd lost a pulse seems inherently unreasonable?
Thank you from Denmark 👍🏻
I would like to know why is it necessary for the police officer to shoot a unarmed man black man that is only being stop for a misdemeanor and is unarmed and only resisting arrest not attacking the police officers
Floyd wasn’t shot so your question has absolutely NOTHING to do with this case.
Lol
why 'black'? The racist mind thinks alike
(RE Comments at approx 50 minutes in.) Murder is a subset of Homicide, indicating a criminal intent or utter recklessness. Homicide is death occurring as a result of another person's actions, and does not indicate any crime has been committed, thus, the crime is called Murder in the Second Degree, and not Homicide in the Second Degree.
Paramedic here: cardiac arrest literally means death. Everyone dies of cardiac arrest. It's a synonym. This does not mean that he died from cardiac causes. He was definitely asphyxiated. He easily could have been convicted with first degree murder. Isn't felony murder usually 1st degree?
Actually, case law has allowed felony murder to be used to convict people of murder when they did nothing other than commit a non criminal act barely tangentially related to the actual death.
Chavin didn't apply pressure for 9 minutes to Floyd's neck. That was disproven by Nelson. Did this woman even watch the trial?
hi Anne, I am watching this case in Covid lockdown, i remember my son showing me the incident involving Floyd at the time it happened, what struck me while watching was why officer Chauvin was looking straight at the bystanders...i actually felt he was looking at me through the lens while i was begging him to move, as i had a feeling this was going to create a social media storm. I am of the belief that officer Chauvin did not intend to harm Floyd however i do feel he was just picking up the trash from the streets. Most citizens pass homeless drug users on our streets everyday without blinking an eye, all of a sudden the world is pretending to care because it is on facebook. I wish all legal teams involved in this case a healthy way forward, for me its caused a conflict in my emotions. I am disgusted how this incident has turned into a race matter when i see it as a class matter...
How is it fair that bystanders can be called as witnesses, but that the comments or input from the 3 other most
involved participants, ie officers Lane, Kueng, and Tao, cannot be called as witnesses? Or that the experts who
examined reports and videos/photos and produced a report can say that they rendered an opinion without speaking
to participants involved in the incident?
i think because they have been charged as well
Question- I've heard that Chauvin and Floyd knew each other and had several run ins prior to the homicide. If this is true, why is this not considered premeditated and therefore first degree, rather second? Thanks!
They can’t bring in anything like that (people saying that they had “run ins”) as there’s no evidence to support that, it’s just hearsay. Hearsay can’t be introduced as evidence.
I assure you my friend if there was any slightest reason for the first degree , he would have been charged with that, attorney general would not have taken any chances.
Thanks Professor for your helpful explainer of the case and issues at hand. As a lay person I am curious as to what effect the apparent confusion about specific cause of death will have on the jury’s ruling. With all due respect to jurisprudence and legal process, this feels like an exercise in mass-gaslighting. We all saw the video. Also, why are the videos treated as a lower tier of evidence so to speak, the defense has tried to determine whether expert witnesses based most of their opinion on the video footage, and seem to be trying to discredit them on this account (by saying generally “we know it looks bad, but...”) Are the videos not absolutely critical evidence to evaluate in this case?
That is not particular to this case , that happens to every case, every defense lawyer in the world tries to undermine the evidence of prosecutor and that is their job as a defense attorney . Now to take that into consideration depends on the jury. On the remark of mass gaslighting , any case is designed to be dealt with prosecution and defense, judge and the jury ,their is no public opinion involved , so their is no chance of mass gaslighting , now since this is high profile case and many people see court case first time , it seems unfair to them ,filled with deception and gaslighting.
"The ME concluded that George Floyd died of heart failure..." Not so! There is no such suggestion from anyone in this case. Heart failure is congestive heart failure, wherein the heart does not beat and/or function as it should, the consequence being that the lungs fill with fluid. This didn't happen here nor has it ever been suggested by anyone, ME or otherwise.
I am appalled that any human being can find Derek Chauvin not guilty, or can listen to Eric Nelson,, without taking to the street. Inhumanity. It was chauvin's intent to kilo.
Maturity I guess. Nelson is doing his job, if Chauven is found guilty or innocent it will be within the prescribes of the law and not public opinion. Everyone should have a right to protest bit not to loot and use this as an excuse. Been very interesting watching this case. It could go either way. I have seen strong opinions for or against, the law must take its course.
If the laws can justify my death, my survival justifies your death period....basic instinct.... survival..... solution is track trace AND treat police mental health, and mandatory full rehab for drug users, and death sentence for manufacturing or selling drugs....
Thank you for the video. I'm just so puzzled by this trial , the charges, the witnesses allowed. Will be interesting to see how the jury takes it all in and what they decide..
Edit: And speaking of the jury, we all know the possible ramifications of an acquittal. Would the fact that they're all well aware that if they acquit , it could mean further destruction of their communities, and possibly cost them their lives, be a factor in the appeals process if Chauvin is found guilty?
Take out everything else, just the video and Chauvin's indifference during the video seals his guilt to me.
I am horrified. I understand that you are trying to explain this legally. I see 3 cops killing a man. Chavín is the most guilty, his buddies sure helped.
All these subscribers, so few views, and only this comment. Beyond a reasonable doubt or probable cause of gas lighting? No wonder students suing law schools is a thing.
Do you want to borrow my copy of Maimonides' Guide for the Perplexed?
"...since Mr. Floyd was killed..." "The Homicide sparked..." ??? Lost me right there. I've just finished watching the opening of the case for the defence in this matter, day #1 for the defence. (Having also watched the entire case for the prosecution). I was under the crazy misapprehension that whether Mr. Floyd was 'killed', and whether it was a 'homicide' were matters under consideration by the court. I expect the commentary by news outlets to be pedestrian, uninformed and partisan. Didn't expect to see it from a School of Law Professor.
The defendant's actions caused the death of George Floyd. He intended the death, wanted it, and felt he would never face consequences.
Why don’t you show your proof of that claim. The prosecution hasn’t been able to.
callejera You say Chauvin intended and wanted death. What is the evidence for that statement? You seem to know things about him, like his feelings.
Lol
Lol
You keep saying "George Floyd's Homicide," which has me confused. There is a whole lot in this video that makes me think, as a legal non-expert, that you're missing some "allegedly" and "in my opinions."
Both of the medical examiners classified it as a homicide
Not leading at all
Please learn and try to speak without a lot of "Um...Ah...And da...y'know's".
The only expert not hired for their opinion was the doctor who did the autopsy
Robert Otis Dr. Andrew Baker is employed and paid as the Hennepin County Chief Medical Office did the autopsy. Dr. Martin Tobin testified free.
You must have blinked!
No need for the next 3 videos. Chauvin is Walking free. In 10 days.
Wrong.
I'm thinking this as well, although we have to factor that the jurors are well aware of what an acquittal will mean for them. Hopefully they feel safe enough to judge this case on the merits, but they're only human...
Must be some crystal ball you have there. Should I assume you’ve not actually watched the trial?
Miguel Nolasco What evidence did you find in the trial to support that?
I can't wait for this dumb lady's emotional reaction after.