3rd degree could be problematic. The defense will surely appeal based on the argument that the 3rd degree charge should not have been reinstated. If they were to win that appeal, Chauvin walks as he cannot be retried on the other 2 charges because of double jeopardy.
I’m pretty sure if Chauvin is found guilty on any charge he will appeal. Chauvin’s lawyers have already raised the issue that the jury might be tainted because they weren’t sequestered when the protests broke out over Daunte Wright. Also the comments from Maxine Waters they are saying is a politician attempting to influence the jury.
The case is easy enough for the jurors to decide their personal position in one or two days work if you ask me. But because of the nature of the crime, which is the fuzzy line of police/military work, we are likely to get one or two holding a strong position of opposition and that means it could last longer than one might think. The judge will pressure them to work it out. And they'll likely be stuck. I doubt this goes a week though.
That's true. However, if he is found guilty on manslaughter (for example) and wins an appeal, they can at least retry him on the manslaughter charge. In my example, he cannot be retried if the courts agree that the 3rd degree charge should not have been reinstated. There is nothing he could be retried on.
I'll take your word on it but the jury isn't supposed to consider issues like that. My own view is that based on the case that has been presented 3rd degree murder is the most likely. 2nd degree is possible but has a harder bar to prove.
Not sure where I said the jury is supposed to consider issues life that. I'm just pointing out a legal statement of fact. Assume he is acquitted on the 2 second degree charges but found guilty of the 3rd degree charge. The defense expectedly appeals. Higher court(s) rule that the judge erred in allowing the 3rd degree charge to be brought back into play and throw out the 3rd degree conviction. Considering double jeopardy has been attached to the other 2 charges, there is nothing to retry him on. Just pointing out a possibility.
My guess is he gets 3rd degree manslaughter. I think the Jury will view this as police negligence of the suspect, and not be able to show intent. He'll do some light jail time, and spend most of his sentence on probation. Then he'll get a nice slot as the policing "expert" panelist on FoxNews for the next 20 years.
The defense is so lame that of course they would appeal. They are grasping at straws to save this scumbag of a cop. I hope he pays for this crime, and hope he suffers more than a little.
I think we're talking about two different things here. I'm talking about what I think is the most likely verdict and not whether it will be appealed or be problematic.
It isn't "lame" for a defendant to appeal a conviction. It happens all the time. Certainly this is an unusual case with factors that are not present in other cases that could serve as grounds for conviction. When the trial judge says on the record, from the bench, that what just happened may have just handed the defense grounds for an appeal, of course any defendant would appeal a conviction.
The decision is now in the hands of the jury. Hopefully justice will be served. And hopefully whatever decision is rendered doesn't spur violence and increasing division. The entire world is watching.
I agree with you that 3rd degree seems to be the most likely verdict. It is also the most problematic sole outcone.
The reason Cahill reinstated it was because it was precedent from the Minny appellate court. So he has precedent to back him up.
