Jury to resume deliberations in Derek Chauvin’s trial in death of George Floyd
The prosecution’s case against Chauvin featured 38 witnesses broken into three parts. They sought to show Chauvin killed Floyd when the former Minneapolis Police officer kneeled on the neck and back of handcuffed, prone Floyd for 9 minutes and 29 seconds on May 25, 2020.
“This case is exactly what you thought when you saw it first, when you saw that video,” prosecuting attorney Steve Schleicher said in closing arguments. “It is exactly that. You can believe your eyes. It’s exactly what you believed. It’s exactly what you saw with your eyes. It’s exactly what you knew, what you felt in your gut. It’s what you now know in your heart. This wasn’t policing. This was murder.”
Defense attorney Eric Nelson argued that Chauvin’s use of force was unattractive but appropriate and said he was distracted by the crowd of hostile bystanders on the scene. He also argued that Floyd died due to fentanyl and methamphetamine use, his resistance of officers and his underlying heart problems, rather than due to Chauvin’s actions.
“It’s not the proper analysis because the 9 minutes and 29 seconds ignores the previous 16 minutes and 59 seconds. It completely disregards it,” he said. “Human behavior is unpredictable, and nobody knows it better than a police officer.”
The second-degree murder charge says Chauvin intentionally assaulted Floyd with his knee, which unintentionally caused Floyd’s death. The third-degree murder charge says Chauvin acted with a “depraved mind, without regard for human life.” And the second-degree manslaughter charge says Chauvin’s “culpable negligence” caused Floyd’s death.
If convicted, Chauvin could face up to 40 years in prison for second-degree murder, up to 25 years for third-degree murder and up to 10 years for second-degree manslaughter. The charges are to be considered separate, so Chauvin could be convicted of all, some or none of them.
Gov. Tim Walz requested additional law enforcement assistance from Ohio and Nebraska in advance of the verdict, according to a press release from his office.
Closing arguments took up all Monday
“He was not going to let these bystanders tell him what to do. He was going to do what he wanted, how he wanted, for as long as he wanted. And there was nothing, nothing they can do about it because he had the authority. He had the power, and the other officers, the bystanders were powerless,” he said. “He was trying to win, and George Floyd paid for it with his life.”
He contrasted Chauvin’s “ego-based pride” with the proper feelings of pride in wearing a police badge and praised policing as a noble profession. He insisted the state was prosecuting Chauvin individually — not policing in general.
“This is not an anti-police prosecution; it is a pro-police prosecution,” he said. “There is nothing worse for good police than bad police.”
In response, Nelson said Chauvin acted as a “reasonable officer” would in that situation and said there was no evidence he intentionally or purposefully used force that was unlawful.
“You have to look at it from the reasonable police officer standard. You have to take into account that officers are human beings, capable of making mistakes in highly stressful situations,” Nelson said. “In this case, the totality of the circumstances that were known to a reasonable police officer in the precise moment the force was used demonstrates that this was an authorized use of force, as unattractive as it may be. This is reasonable doubt.”
“The reason George Floyd is dead is because Mr. Chauvin’s heart is too small,” he said.