There's been a lot of discussion about why evidence of Derek Chauvin's past brutality, including the fact that he previously shot and killed a man, has not been admitted into evidence.
The more relevant question is, why wasn't he prosecuted for it?
mintpressnews.com/chief-prosecut…
The more relevant question is, why wasn't he prosecuted for it?
mintpressnews.com/chief-prosecut…
Lest we forget, it was Amy Klobuchar who was head prosecutor of Hennepin County at the time and made the decision not to prosecute Chauvin.
Had she done that, George Floyd would be alive today.
Had she done that, George Floyd would be alive today.
Believe me, I understand the frustration that the jury will not hear about Chauvin's lengthy history of misconduct. But as a criminal defense attorney, I absolutely understand why.
Chauvin is on trial for George Floyd's murder - not anyone else's.
Chauvin is on trial for George Floyd's murder - not anyone else's.
Remember police officers are rarely prosecuted. The criminal legal system functions to oppress Black and Brown people. If you argue that what are termed "prior bad acts" should be admissible here, then you are ultimately harming the people who the system targets.
PS. I should say Mr. Floyd *could* have been alive today not would have been. A whole chain of events would have had to occur, including Chauvin at least been convicted and fired, so there is no guarantee prosecution would have been enough, but it would have been something.
Why does it feel like sometimes you are begging for crumbs?
*being not been
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
