A fascinating development in the Derek Chauvin Trial in death of George Floyd today. It has to do with the passenger of the car George Floyd was first pulled from an invocation of his 5th amendment right to not self incriminate. A wee thread on justice.
I won’t name the passenger in the car because the judge has not yet decided on their testimony, so I will refer to them as George Floyd’s friend, or the friend etc. On one of the police’s body worn cameras, you can see a man sitting in the passenger seat of Floyd’s car.
This man has been subpoenaed to testify by the defense and the prosecutor. Both sides want to hear what he has to say. And both for very different reasons. Remember, one side is the state and the state can bring charges.
Charges like 3rd Degree Murder in Minnesota if you provide drugs to someone that dies as a result of ingesting those drugs. A third lawyer, Floyd’s friend’s lawyer, is protecting her client by saying his testimony would put him at risk of future prosecution.
The defense wants to use him to establish he saw George Floyd take drugs that day. That he ‘fell asleep quickly’. They want you to think passed out. The defense is arguing that it was drugs that killed Floyd, not the lack of oxygen due to the knee on his neck.
Imagine you’re the passenger for a second. You just saw your friend die under police. You saw them take his limp body away in an ambulance. Now, because you were in the car with Floyd, you get arrested for his murder because of the drugs you may or may not have given him.
Justice is not a cut and dry thing. It is very subjective which makes it difficult to achieve. But what if in this case, to ensure Justice for George Floyd, the prosecution provides immunity for the friends testimony? Make it conditional even.
In fact, could they not do a few things here? If the friend is a criminal, could the prosecution also not let it be known they would seek the maximum penalty for any future arrest as a means of deterrent? This would allow for the testimony as well potentially reform someone.
And isn’t that kind of the point? The judge could allow him to testify to only certain questions limiting the scope to those that would not be self incriminating. However, this too is risky because he might incriminate inadvertently just by over answering a question.
The judge could also rule, it’s too dangerous for the friend to take the witness stand at all. This would hurt the defense because without this witness, it will be difficult to pin George Floyd’s death on him. Fascinating. We’ll see how the judge rules soon. Root for justice.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
