It's the start of Officer Chauvin's trial in Minneapolis today, better known as the Lloyd George's killer's trial. It's being televised by CBS down here in AZ, as well likely as other networks. This happens to be what we listen to and we haven't searched for who else may be broadcasting the trial.
I've heard the judge's instruction to the jury as well as his ruling to the attorneys about objective vs. subjective testimony, or observable actions rather than reading the minds of the persons involved. Various legal experts have spoken during breaks in "newsworthy" content to fill in what's required to convict, what different legal rulings mean, what the case of the prosecution and defense will likely be.
Much will be made of the drugs in Mr. Floyd's body, his existing heart condition, his recent covid illness. These will be brought forward as evidence that he would have died anyway very soon. But this is where I balk at the validity of the defense's argument.
Let's frame it slightly differently, something we can all understand, something much discussed. Say your loved one is terminal with a painful disease, such as cancer. They will die in a few days, perhaps even less, in excruciating pain. Medication - legal medication - no longer eases the agony. Should somebody, in an act of mercy, shorten their life, shorten their suffering, by even a few minutes, they are guilty of murder in the eyes of the law. If it's murder for mercy, should it not be equally murder for anything other than self defense? And of course, a man who's handcuffed, prone on the ground with four men holding him down, unconscious and not breathing, no pulse to be found, can in no way be an excuse for actions against them being self defense. There were simply no actions left to Mr. George long before Chauvin lifted his knee off his neck.
I'd find Chauvin guilty of the highest degree of murder chargeable. Period. May he rot in prison, and give every other cop in this country pause before doing anything similar.
No comments:
Post a Comment