HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Wife of Murder Pig Derek ...

Sat May 30, 2020, 01:54 AM

Wife of Murder Pig Derek Chauvin files for divorce.


2 replies, 999 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 2 replies Author Time Post
Reply Wife of Murder Pig Derek Chauvin files for divorce. (Original post)
Progressive Jones May 2020 OP
PJMcK May 2020 #1
Progressive Jones May 2020 #2

Response to Progressive Jones (Original post)

Sat May 30, 2020, 07:01 AM

1. "Alleged" Murder Pig

This article, also from The Daily Beast by the brilliant Barbara McQuade, illustrates the uphill climb the prosecutors will have to convict Chauvin.

Although it's behind their paywall, here's an important excerpt:

The answer is that the law deliberately stacks the deck in favor of police officers. All criminal defendants have a right to a unanimous finding by a jury of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. But because we entrust officers to use force, even deadly force, to protect the public, we make them guilty of a crime only when they clearly exceed their public authority. How much legal protection is too much?

To convict Chauvin of third-degree murder, the prosecution will have to prove that he acted with a depraved mind, without regard for human life. For second-degree manslaughter, the prosecutor will have to prove that Chauvin acted with gross negligence. These are the same standards that apply in every case of third-degree murder or manslaughter under Minnesota law.

What’s different when the defendant is a police officer is that he may use a public authority defense. That means the state has the burden of proving that the force used was not justified. A jury would be instructed that to conclude that the force was not justified, it must find that Chauvin created an unreasonable risk of death or great bodily harm.

Under Supreme Court case law of Graham v. Connor, the jury would further be told that reasonableness must be judged from the perspective of an officer on the scene, rather than with the 20/20 vision of hindsight. Further, the jury would be told that their reasonableness inquiry extends only to those facts known to the officer at the precise moment that the officer acted with force. The jury would be reminded that to determine reasonableness, it must consider that police officers are often forced to make split-second judgments about the amount of force that is necessary under circumstances that are tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving. This standard can be very difficult to meet.

The rest is here:


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to PJMcK (Reply #1)

Sat May 30, 2020, 12:05 PM

2. It will always be Murder Pig to me. Unfortunately, it IS too hard to convict a bad cop.

State Legislatures are going to have to correct that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread