Closing arguments on Monday; what will the verdict be?

This widely seen image taken from a bystander video on May 25 is detrimental to the defense case to the point of assuring a conviction. It shows Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin with his knee placed on the neck of the previously struggling George Floyd even after Floyd was no longer resisting.

By Carolyn Yeager

BEFORE SEEING THE CLOSING ARGUMENTS, but after watching the entirety of the 13 days of courtroom testimony televised to the public, I am willing to offer my prediction of what this jury will do. I sat on one jury in my life, in a civil case. I know that the expectation to overcome differences and reach a final verdict is strong, and most jurors take that responsibility seriously. I've thought all along, and continue to think that the damning blow against Derek Chauvin is the video that shows all 9min25sec that George Floyd is pinned to the ground, even after he had ceased all resistance and apparently stopped breathing (shown in image above).

The prosecution opened their case with it and no doubt will close with it, too. The final crucial time span that Floyd was unresponsive was somewhere around 2 minutes, plus or minus, until the ambulance with paramedics arrived. During this time even the assisting officers voiced some concerns, which Chauvin appeared to ignore. Also voicing their concern was the group of bystanders on the sidewalk who vociferously called for the policeman to 'let up.'

I believe the jury will be unable to render a “not guilty” verdict because of the impact of those 2 minutes.

In his defense of Chauvin, Eric Nelson basically argued that police officers' sometimes split-second decisions made under stressful and even dangerous circumstances should not be “second-guessed'' after the fact by those who weren't there or are not trained law enforcement. In this case specifically, Chauvin had to consider the busy street traffic, the angry crowd on the sidewalk, the fact that EMS was on the way, and Floyd's previous uncooperative behavior in deciding not to do more for Floyd and instead wait for the paramedics (who took longer than they should have).  Can the jury see this as reasonable behavior? Whether they can or not, I doubt they will. And now this argument has been weakened by Chauvin's decision to not take the stand and explain what was going through his mind.

Not that I think it's a wrong decision. It's what I expected.

But this leaves something of a hole in the otherwise able defense strategy attorney Nelson has crafted together. No matter how persuasive other evidence of following police procedure might be, it can't undo the horrible appearance of heartlessness conveyed by that single highly circulated image. Naturally, the prosecution continues to make the most of it.

It remains to be seen whether jurors sympathetic to the defense position will put up enough resistance to those who want to convict. Three things that keep me from accepting a murder charge are (among others) 1) the strong resistance Floyd continued to put up against all attempts to control him even though he kept saying and promising he would comply, 2) the particular drugs he was clearly consuming at the time of his arrest which played havoc with his heart, lungs and brain, and 3) lack of a motive or any vindictiveness or anger exhibited on the part of Officer Chauvin. Floyd's behavior was clearly self-destructive.

The death of George Floyd falls most naturally into the category of involuntary manslaughter, ie. unintentional death in consequence of the actions of the accused. I do believe Floyd's own actions contributed to his death, and I would be comfortable finding Chauvin not guilty of any charges, but I think the majority of the jurors will never go that route.Therefore, to reach a verdict I predict the twelve men and women will have to compromise on manslaughter.

If the jury hardliners demand 3^rd degree murder to better satisfy the mob, it's possible they could force that on the others as “not that different” in outcome from manslaughter. If that happens, it would be a shame.

That's my take, overall. I don't think closing arguments will offer any surprises, but I will watch them even though I can barely tolerate the prosecution lawyers anymore. I am sick of them. I'm wondering who will be doing the closing. My guess is Jerry Blackwell, but could it be a team effort?