THREAD: What should we make of the arrest of the officer who killed #GeorgeFloyd on state third-degree murder charges?
1/ Although there are both federal and state investigations of former officer Derek Chauvin, he was only arrested on a state third-degree murder charge.
As a starting point, that does *not* mean he ultimately won't be charged by the Feds or face additional state charges.
As a starting point, that does *not* mean he ultimately won't be charged by the Feds or face additional state charges.
2/ Chauvin was charged with the most straightforward, readily provable crime. In Minnesota, third-degree murder is when you cause the death of another by "perpetuating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life."
3/ That does not require prosecutors to prove that the murder was premeditiated or that Chauvin intended to kill him, both of which are more difficult to prove.
The video alone likely gives prosecutors enough to argue for a third-degree murder conviction.
The video alone likely gives prosecutors enough to argue for a third-degree murder conviction.
4/ They will ask the jury to infer Chauvin's mental state from the video. It would be easier for a jury to conclude that he acted without regard for the sanctity of human life than to conclude that he intentionally murdered Lloyd.
5/ Remember that prosecutors have to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and in my experience, it can be hard to make a case against a police officer.
They are difficult to investigate, and juries can give them the benefit of the doubt for acting in the heat of the moment.
They are difficult to investigate, and juries can give them the benefit of the doubt for acting in the heat of the moment.
6/ Prosecutors shouldn't charge cases they're not confident they can prove. Plus, once prosecutors charge a defendant, they are on a "clock" because defendants have procedural rights, including the right to a speedy trial.
7/ So during an ongoing investigation, it's not surprising that prosecutors were more cautious with initial charges. They can add additional state charges later.
The Feds can also separately indict him, which would mean he would face criminal charges in two courts.
The Feds can also separately indict him, which would mean he would face criminal charges in two courts.
8/ As @BarbMcQuade explains in this excellent thread, federal civil rights charges (which would be the charges that apply here) can be very difficult to prove.
9/ Specifically, federal civil rights charges require proof of "willfulness," which requires prosecutors to prove that the officer knew he was breaking the law and intended to do so when he killed Floyd.
That is a very high bar to meet in any case.
That is a very high bar to meet in any case.
10/ So that's why the Feds have to be careful and build a strong case before taking it on, and I agree with @BarbMcQuade that we should consider reforms to that statute.
That said, the inadequacy of the letter of the law is only one obstacle to successfully prosecuting officers.
That said, the inadequacy of the letter of the law is only one obstacle to successfully prosecuting officers.
11/ There are other practices that can make it difficult. For instance, in Chicago, officers usually have the right to speak with a union representative before being interviewed by prosecutors. (That's a right other suspects are not afforded.)
12/ Hopefully, the death of #GeorgeFloyd sparks reform in the way we police and the way we regulate and prosecute law enforcement officers. /end
