Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Derek Chauvin Was Wrongfully Convicted by the Street Mob, Not the Law
An abominable miscarriage of justice.
[Author’s note: I am indebted to our colleague @eugenekriegsmann for bringing this documentary to our attention and the following represents my modest contribution to the conversation about this shameful, disgraceful chapter in the history of our American Rule of Law.]
On September 1, 2020, I published a post, George Floyd’s Death Was A Tragedy, Because All Lives Matter. It Was Not A Homicide, which was the result of extensive research into the evidence then available upon which the trial of the four officers at the scene was to proceed. The post turned out to be much longer than I had planned it to be partially due to the amount of documentary evidence and other writings about the matter I felt it necessary to review and consider before hitting the publish button.
That research and writing and review of other materials, especially the early autopsy of Floyd, whose system contained, among other things, level 11 fentanyl, over three times the level which could result in death, convinced me beyond a scintilla of doubt that Officer Chauvin followed training procedures he had been taught for many years to the letter and that whatever happened to Floyd, it was absolutely not murder.
I have just finished watching the recently released (non-commercially) movie The Fall of Minneapolis, which runs close to two hours. It’s a masterful compilation of the evidence, the body cam video of the officers on the scene — dramatically different from the viral video which we have all seen over and over again — interviews with the officers themselves from prison, interviews with retired officers from the precinct which was destroyed in the “mostly peaceful” “protests,” some with as many as 37 years of service, scenes from the trial itself, etc., etc.
Most importantly, this documentary includes an extensive discussion of the deposition of Amy Sweasy in her harassment lawsuit against the then-County Prosecutor, in which she recounts a conversation she had with the Medical Examiner, Dr. Andrew Baker, a few hours after Floyd’s death and autopsy, in which he expressed these opinions:
There were no medical findings that showed any injury to the vital structures of Mr. Floyd’s neck. There were no medical indications of asphyxia or strangulation.
Within a few days, a few additions appeared in the supplemental report of the Medical Examiner containing the unsupported speculation that his death could have been, in part, the result of “subdual by law enforcement,” which, of course, was all the County Prosecutor, the Socialist/Marxist Attorney General Keith Ellison and the FBI which had by then inexplicably entered the case needed to go forward with indictments and/or charges against all four officers.
While it is impossible to summarize a documentary of this length and detail, except to note that I hope every person who still thinks there is still a viable Rule of Law in America will watch this movie to test that belief, I will note, as a former trial lawyer, that some of the decisions made by Judge Cahill and some of the testimony of officers, including most egregiously the Chief of Police, are, to put it most kindly, troubling and in the case of the Chief of Police, very possibly downright perjurious.
Lawyers have it drilled into them first in Law School and then, much more importantly, in acquiring the experience — and scars and bruises and lacerations — of actually trying cases, not to criticize fellow lawyers about their handling of their cases. They know more than anyone about the real case than anyone else and, of paramount importance. Also, as a matter of legal ethics, never criticize a Judge for his judgment calls in a case.
That said, it is hard not to question the wisdom of some of Judge Cahill’s rulings in some critical areas. His apparent refusal to allow the defense to display to the jury the pages from the training manuals, which clearly corroborate in words and graphics that Officer Chauvin precisely followed the section of the MPD training manual outlining the proper procedures for Maximum Restraint Technique (MRT), Section 5-316.
In the documentary, Derek Chauvin’s mother said she had his training manuals, which were easily accessible to anyone with an internet connection. A reading of those specifics, especially with the accompanying sketch that shows a technique identical to that used by Chauvin, leaves no doubt, reasonable, substantial, flimsy, or otherwise, that Chauvin was using the technique he had been trained with for years. The Chief of Police testified under oath that Chauvin’s technique was not a part of their training. I was not in that trial in any capacity, but I can read. After viewing the documentary, my original conclusion has been strengthened considerably.
This trial was, in Derek Chauvin’s own words in the interview in the movie, an absolute “sham.” I would call it an abomination of the American Rule of Law resulting in the imprisonment of a law enforcement officer for what may well be the rest of his life. All due to the sheer intimidation power of the street mob on all elements of the trial— including, tragically, the jury and the Judge.
I cannot venture even a guess as to what may be done under Minnesota procedure to rectify what has clearly been a monumental miscarriage of justice. I do, however, have a deep and abiding conviction that this jury verdict will remain a permanent stain on the shambles we continue, with Hunter Biden and the Biden Crime Family, for one example, to call our Rule of Law. I daresay that you may come away from watching this documentary feeling the same way.
Published in General
America was an interesting experiment. It might be revived at some point. But people have to believe it can be revived. It has been revived before.
I downloaded the movie – haven’t watched it yet.
Thank you Jim for the mention, and thank you for expanding on the subject itself. I wasn’t much interested in the case when it originally hit since the whole scene turned me off. In my years working in public schools with large minority populations I saw enough of the reality of those environments to understand minefield that any white person in a position of any authority must traverse almost daily. Every word and every action had to be very carefully edited to survive. Chauvin was doomed as soon as he set foot in that scene. BLM was looking for an issue, and had George Floyd not happened then something else would have. Like the current response to Gaza, that situation was exploited to its max by the left. We are in the midst of a sort of glacial revolution, enormous is size, slow moving, but almost impossible to stop.
The hazards are not the glaciers, as such. We know pretty much where they are. The icebergs they produce are a greater danger.
Very well put! I like the image.
As Bari Weiss (and many others before her) said in her Barbara Olson Lecture to the Federalist Society, if it cannot be revived there will no longer be an exceptional Nation to which the world may turn, no more greatest Nation ever created by the mind of man, no more leader in and creator of innumerable discoveries, inventions, intellectual achievements, no more strongest in the world military to which the weak Nations can turn , and the list goes on and on and on.
Fully aware that this question has been posed many ways in the last few years by many observers but I still must ask: if this group of criminals (Biden and his entire family and who knows how many others in the “leadership” in DC) and pseudocriminals (may be a made up word) like the incredibly evil and/or stupid and/or traitorous Mayorkas and many Senate Democrats and just about all Democrat Representatives had decided that, beginning January 20, 2021 they were going to do everything in their power to destroy the United States of America, what could they have possibly done differently than they have, in fact, done?
I do not have a good answer to that one.
I get really “down” and pessimistic from time to time, especially in the area of this post, the dramatic deterioration of the Rule of Law, but then I have to ask myself- what other choice do we have but to do everything in our power to revive this magnificent experiment in self-government despite the best efforts of the far-left to tear it down?
I return to only one answer to that one, every time.
Happy Thanksgiving.
Believe me, it will be close to two hours well spent.
Thank you again for bringing this movie to our attention- I’m not at all sure I would have watched and studied the entire movie as I did had I not seen your post. I admire your analogy of a glacial revolution and the gloss put on it by @DaveSchmidt of the danger of the icebergs they produce but I would like to offer another which occurred to me after viewing the movie, researching for this post, going back and looking at my post of 2020 along with a number of other writings and considering some of the bizarre forces which seemed to come together all at once after that fateful day in May of 2020. That seemed to me to be very much like the perfect storm- so many forces combining in the span of not only just a few days but in some cases few hours. The Mayor, surely the weakest little cretin in the country, his abandonment of the officers of that precinct who had served so faithfully, the Attorney General, an avowed socialist whose conduct is more like Marxist, the many, many errors of the Trial Judge, one of which I discussed in the post but so many others like refusing to move the trial out of that venue, surrounded by a fortress like atmosphere and crowds screaming instructions at the jury like Maxine Waters’ obscene rants, the almost instantaneous involvement of the FBI and the Department of [In]Justice and its effect on the apparently lacking in any semblance of courage whatsoever Medical Examiner who flipped in a matter of days, the way the Minneapolis riots spread overnight, and surely with the expenditure of huge ready amounts of cash, just for a very few examples of the things that came together in a short period of time. If that’s a conspiracy, then I’m a certified conspiracy theorist.
Thanks again and Happy Thansgiving to you and yours.
Jim, if you are a conspiracy theorist you are not alone on this one. I am growing more and more aware of a coincidence of leftist movements all of which seem to be congealing over the years since Obama took office. It strikes me that the left finally felt ready to push their full agenda with Obama, but Trump delayed it for four years. Once he was out of the way and the walking dead took over the White House they gave their movement the go ahead.
Being retired I have a good deal of time to listen to podcasts by some great people. The more I hear, the more things begin to take on a look and feel of something much bigger than the LGBT+ Trans garbage, BLM, White Supremacy, men competing in women’s sports, Critical Race Theory, transitioning underage minors, destruction of meaningful curriculum in schools, and on and on. There are just too many leftist backed projects all being pushed at the same moment for this to be anything but a coordinated movement, in other words, a Conspiracy. I don’t know who is behind all of this, but I have some fair guesses beginning with Soros and running through China and Iran, not that they are the only ones. We either need to grab control of the reins or surrender forever this great nation.
Rule of thumb: If the defense asks for a change of venue and the judge refuses it, his intent is to prevent a fair trial.
This was my thought, too. The first and perhaps most egregiously bad decision of the judge was to disallow a change of venue. Really. There’s absolutely no excuse. He wanted to preside over this sh**show.
One question, though. Why did the Supreme Court decide not to hear the appeal? Anyone know?
My impression is that SCOTUS wants to deal with precedent setting situations. A simple criminal trial doesn’t present any constitutional issues that need clarifying. The injustices in this situation, though awful, is something that should be resolved in a state level court or, perhaps, a lower level federal jurisdiction.
I agree even though it is painful to confront the reality that their action will mean Chauvin may spend the rest of his life in prison. The above comment correctly states the obvious remedy and that was in the Appellate System of the State of Minnesota and again while I was not counsel in the case and have to say this with that qualification, it is a tragedy that they did not correct the glaringly egregious error committed by the Trial Judge in refusing to transfer this case out of his venue.
I don’t know about that. Most cases that the Supreme Court hears are boring issues that don’t involve big constitutional questions. You just never hear about them. Many, maybe most, of the cases that they hear are decided unanimously or near unanimously.
The judge had every reason to assume that permitting change of venue would cause the mob to riot, endangering his life, and the lives of his family.
The appeals court may have concluded that anything but a guilty verdict would bring about another 700 cities in flames.
With all due respect, and fully realizing that the following statement might justifiably be met with a retort on the order of “easy for you to say”, but the fear of the trial judge and the speculation of the appellate courts about the resultant injury and death and property damage are all purely – not theoretically – irrelevant to the issues confronting those officials, every one of whom took a solemn oath (I’m so old I remember when the word “solemn” before that word was to be taken as its time-honored meaning) to defend and protect the Constitution and laws of their state. It is painful to say the following: every one of them violated that oath.
If judges did their Constitutional duty, Donald Trump wouldn’t be spending time in four courtrooms.
Judging by many of the above comments, we are seeing a breakdown not only in our healthcare system but in the legal system as well, and probably a few other functions of government. Soros and his disciples are affecting a change in our system of government that could spell disaster. As @JimGeorge says, the judges in Minnesota have violated their oaths. If you are unwilling to do what your position demands out of fear, then you should resign your office. On a number of occasions during my long career in education I stood up to administrators who were asking me to do things which I well understood were not legal. In doing so, I risked my job, or, at least, risked an evaluation coming back that was less than satisfactory. In either case, a career decision. I have no respect for anyone who allows intimidation of any kind to keep them from performing their duties. To allow an innocent man to rot in jail for 20 years is simply grossly immoral, that it is done out of fear is an act of craven cowardice.
Tiny list of those who have violated their oaths:
Merrick Garland
Jack Smith
Judge Tanya Chutkan
DA Fani Willis
AG NY Letitia James
Judge Total Nutcase Engeron NYC
DA NYC
US Attorney in DC persecuting J6 defendants like some Stasi prosecutor
Sadly, several Judges in the Federal District Court in Washington, DC
FBI Director Christopher Wray
Note I said this was a tiny list– that’s the saddest part of all.
I cannot tell you how refreshing and inspiring it is to hear someone say out loud words which would have seemed so unremarkable not so many years ago but would now be regarded as at least highly suspect in our new “woke” – synonym for corrupt and dishonest, among other words- society. Thank you.
PS: we often remark on how our parents would react if they could come back and see how the world they left years ago has turned out. Food for thought. Not a pretty sight.
Thank you Jim. I am 78 years old and retired for a bit over 10 years now. I had to be very careful when teaching to not express my thoughts in faculty meetings or workshops, but I had no problem ever telling principals in the privacy of their offices exact what I thought. For most of my career I was pretty safe doing that because of the nature of my assignment. I was considered one of the most successful Sped Level 4 teachers in the district. In essence, I was irreplaceable. To prove that, when I retired it took three years for them to find a teacher who would remain in my classroom for more than a week. It was a nice buffer, and it did allow me be pretty frank and open. I was never candid when it came to pointing the total importance of personal integrity in the profession. I do believe that one of the reasons I was successful with those kids for so long is that I never compromised my integrity with them or their parents. I learned that integrity from my parents and had it reinforced during my service as an officer in the US Navy. I truly dread what my parents would think about where our country is going. I am personally appalled.
For a laugh, take a look at the photo caption on this BBC article dated September 6, 2023:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65217171
It reads:
“Former Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio wearing a T-shirt with a slogan lauding Derek Chauvin, the police officer convicted of murdering George Floyd”
The T-shirt carries what has been the motto of the Proud Boys since long before anyone ever heard of George Floyd: WESTERN CHAUVINIST.
“Chauvinist”, of course, has been a political term since the 1830s. Derek Chauvin merely had the misfortune of inheriting a name which had accidentally picked up negative connotations from its use by a French political commentator.
The miscarriage of justice has been carried pretty close to its obvious consequences. NRO is reporting this morning (11/25) that Chauvin was stabbed and seriously injured in the federal penitentiary where he is being held. Did anyone not expect this? Any cop in prison is an open and obvious target. That this was allowed to happen is grotesque. If they couldn’t keep him safe he should have been released. Nowhere did I see a death sentence in his sentencing.
Yes, and I wonder if the MPD will paint a mural of him and canonize him as a martyr for the Rule of Law if he dies? Rhetorical question.
“Grotesque” is the right word.
Interesting that the playbook called for this now. (Timing is everything in our pseudo-event driven world…)
The same folks that that cheered on the BLM and the Hamas terrorists are probably “mostly delighted” that Chauvin was seriously injured.
Remember the ignorant reporter who mis-heard “jacobins” as “jackal bins”?
I suspect that there was a bounty put on Chauvin’s head, and that whoever tried to take him out was already serving a life sentence, so that there was nothing further that could be done to him. The more I think about his placement in a federal prison general population, the more I question that legitimacy of our entire system.
The judge has been quoted as saying to a group of judges at a convention or something, that they should always view every case as needing to serve racial justice.