WELCOME TO THE OFFICIAL RICHARD E GERSTEIN JUSTICE BUILDING BLOG. THIS BLOG IS DEDICATED TO JUSTICE BUILDING RUMOR, HUMOR, AND A DISCUSSION ABOUT AND BETWEEN THE JUDGES, LAWYERS AND THE DEDICATED SUPPORT STAFF, CLERKS, COURT REPORTERS, AND CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS WHO LABOR IN THE WORLD OF MIAMI'S CRIMINAL JUSTICE. POST YOUR COMMENTS, OR SEND RUMPOLE A PRIVATE EMAIL AT HOWARDROARK21@GMAIL.COM. Winner of the prestigious Cushing Left Anterior Descending Artery Award.

Monday, March 29, 2021

CHAUVIN TRIAL BEGINS

 The trial of former Minnesota Police Officer charged in the killing of George Floyd has begun.  Opening statements were given.  Can anyone explain to us how Mr. Chauvin will receive a fair trial? There are protests calling for his conviction. The prosecution has every possible lesser included as a charge. There is a spoken belief that an acquittal will cause the state and the country to erupt in flames. Jurors are under pressure. So is the Judge.  

Do not talk to us about what Mr. Chauvin did and how he deserves to be convicted. If that was our thought process then we would be a prosecutor. We are not prosecutors. We stand for those who no one else will stand for. KKK members. Nazi sympathizers who want to march in Jewish neighborhoods. Terrorists, Islamic, white supremacists, whatever. The more offensive the conduct, the more we need to be on guard and insist that the constitution be scrupulously followed.  

Outside of our job, which is really a life calling, we deplore violent police officers. We have had way too many clients whose noses were broken, eyes swollen shut, and were told they fell down or repeatedly hit their head on the cell bars. Query: How many city of Miami or Miami Beach police officers does it take to throw a defendant down a flight of stairs? Answer- None, he fell on his own. 

So do not talk to us about right and wrong. Talk to us about how Mr. Chauvin has a snowball's chance in the Suez Canal of getting a fair trial? Because we do not see it. 

And speaking of the Suez Canal, the Ever Whatever was floated and is now being moved. Hurray! 

21 comments:

Anonymous said...

I agree whole-heartedly. There is a strong defense in this case. The decedent's toxicology report indicates a slew of chemicals that can prove fatal under stress, combined with a respiratory virus that scientists are still studying.

The decedent was struggling to breath - or so he reported - while still in the backseat of the police car. His behavior was erratic and consistent with someone undergoing a panic attack.

I do not know how the judge ruled on the admissibility of this, but during previous arrests we non-jurors know the decedent swallowed narcotics.

For a defense lawyer committed to a fair trial, there seems like more than enough here to establish reasonable doubt.

Now imagine the public reaction to that verdict. Now ask yourself if those jurors are incapable of imagining that same reaction.

This is NOT a fair trial.

Anonymous said...

RUMNPOLE you fool. WHo says there isnt racism in the justice system? You watching this trial? WHo appointed this whiteboy I'll have a ham and american cheese on whitebread with extra mayo as the prosecutor in this case? Its a set up to lose. Who tries a case and doesn't test the electronic system to see if the evidence plays? He is trying to play a tape and whoops! Oh well the tape system doesn't work. The jury doesn't see the evidence and you guessed it another white ass racist cop who killed a nobody black guy walks.
And why is he boring the jury with some police dispatcher? Like she cares to hurt one of her own. And its all boring. He is putting the jury to sleep so they won't pay attention to the evidence and then at the end they say "we didn't see no evidence so not guilty I guess". Why not make it simple? ever heard of the rule keep it simple ? Play the tape. That guy right here siting right there put his knee on Floyd's neck and killed his ass and its on the tape and you see it now do the right thing.
Nah not going to make it easy. Make it boring. Lets call the people who made the police car. Why are the lights red ? Lets call the person who makes the siren noise. Lets call the janitor who swept the street the night before. Bs. I am calling BS and this is a set up and you heard it from me first thou I doubt you print this. You already said you are on Chauvin's side you turn coat MFer.

Rumpole said...

I am for once speechless. Without speech or coherent thought.

Anonymous said...

If you had been blogging in 1992 you would've said the same thing about cops on trial for beating Rodney King...

Rumpole said...

If I had been blogging when Israel got Eichmann and brought him to Israel and put him on trial I would have said the same thing then. I would have said the same thing if Oswald wasn't killed by Ruby and with John Wilkes Booth as well, although the platform was unstable in the 1860s.
So I am pretty sure 1:33 pm you see my point. Great.

Anonymous said...

Mistrial issues: Remember legendary lawyer Roy Black getting the Lozano conviction overturned because the jury was intimidated into finding guilt. It seems to me that the pretrial press conference and speech today had a veiled threat if there is a not a guilty verdict, by a Florida licensed lawyer in Minnesota and using improper English. Is this intentional? Already numerous issues for appeal if cop convicted.

Fake Bert Cooper said...

Rumpole-San, the Japanese have a saying: "A man is who the room he is in".
Chauvin is in a Minnesota courtroom donchaknow.

E a said...

Im a criminal defense attorney an watching the opening by the state coupled w the video without the defenses argument i d convict him

Anonymous said...

So if a defendant commits a crime so infamous and egregious that the whole country is outraged about it, he should get a free pass?

Besides, aren't you discounting the percentage of the American population that thinks BLM are all communist traitors and that George Floyd was some drug-addicted hoodlum scumbag who had it coming? They may not make up half the population, but they're numerous enough to keep Fox News and Trump running.

Anonymous said...

Representing someone when the "court of popular opinion" is out to get them may be one of the most rewarding aspects of our profession. However Mr. Chauvin, a white cop, will get a much fairer shake than what so many other individuals in the system also deserve. That's the real tragedy. Based on what I read regarding jury selection, my bet is that Chauvin will walk.

Rumpole said...

3:03 PM you mistake my concern for a fair trial for arguing for no trial. I did not argue there should be no trial. I saw the video. Chauvin may well have killed Mr. Floyd and for that he needs to be tried and held responsible for what APPEARS to be an outrageous and excessive use of force. I just want the trial to be fair and I am not seeing how that can occur in this environment.

Anonymous said...

"3:03 PM you mistake my concern for a fair trial for arguing for no trial. I did not argue there should be no trial."

In your post, you said "Can anyone explain to us how Mr. Chauvin will receive a fair trial?" and "Talk to us about how Mr. Chauvin has a snowball's chance in the Suez Canal of getting a fair trial? Because we do not see it." And in your 4:09 PM reply, you say "I just want the trial to be fair and I am not seeing how that can occur in this environment." The implication of your complaints is that a "fair trial" for Chauvin is impossible.

So according to you, a "fair trial" for Chauvin is not possible. Since you presumably think that all trials for all defendants should be fair, and a fair trial for Chauvin is not possible, then that means you think there should be no trial for Chauvin, because any trial for him would be unfair. And presumably you think the same for any defendant charged with an offense that causes lasting public outrage.

Unless what? We should wait 2, 4, 5 years for the racial/political outrage to blow over and the public has become suitably disinterested and distracted? How strong was the public outrage leading up to the George Zimmerman trial? Or Casey Anthony trial? Did that make the verdicts foregone conclusions there? It sounds like the jurors they've selected are inoffensive "both-sider" types. Of course, some of them could be stealth jurors.

Anonymous said...

You make it sound like lesser included charges are unfair, I hope I read that wrong.

Anonymous said...

So, if Mr. Chauvin has no chance of getting a fair trial, what is the solution? To nor prosecute him and let his guilty or innocence go undetermined? To prosecute him in Englan or Australia so where very little about the incident and potential reactions to the verdict impact on the verdict? How about to try him before a judge, whose job is to be impartial, rather than a jury who are mere citizens from the community? If only there was a way for the defendant to choose to waive a jury and be tried by the bench?

Our system of justice is not perfect, but it is among the best in the world.

Adam Tebrugge said...

I had to defend a case in an atmosphere like that once. My client did not receive a fair trial. We summoned 500 jurors. All 500 knew about the case. I moved for a change of venue.it was denied. The judge said much the same thing, that no matter where we went in Florida it would be the same. I would have liked to have at least tried to find an impartial jury in a less hostile atmosphere. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev had his death sentence in the Boston marathon bombing case overturned because there was no change of venue and the trial judge did not allow questions about jurors exposure to pressure and publicity. Now the Supreme Court may overturn that decision and in the process discount the necessity of a fair trial. I’m with you, I always want the defendant to get a fair trial no matter who they are or what they are accused of doing.

Anonymous said...

12:44, wouldn’t that defense be available if Floyd had been shot or stabbed? Can you talk a jury into deciding that someone who was strangled for 9:30 minutes died coincidentally to the strangling? Let me tell you the problem. First it’s absurd. Second, people were watching the man die during the strangling and rightfully pointed out the lead up and the death in real time. Third, the defense argued that Chauvin caused the death because he was distracted by the people telling him that his victim was in the throes of death. Finally that Floyd died only after being strangled for 9.5 minutes. I would suggest to you that the fact that he continued to try to breath for longer than 5 minutes means that he was unusually robust! Most people would’ve died much quicker. Chauvin is a cold blooded killer. If he was black and the strangled was a white lady, he would be well on his way to the death chamber. It’s fascinating the contortions that people are capable of when it comes to justifying a 1st degree murderer who happens to be a cop when the victim is a black man.

Anonymous said...

Where in the world exactly is it where most people didn’t witness the murder?

Anonymous said...

Fuck that guy. He is guilty. He should have a trial that is fair. I agree. But after watching the video, I don’t need to see anything else. He killed GF because he could...he could because GF was black. Watch how the cops arrested the trump guy with the gun in Oregon yesterday. If that guy was black, he would be dead.

Anonymous said...

He is getting a fair trial, it is just that what we have heard of his defense is silly. He can argue, I guess, that the man coincidentally died of other things which stopped his breathing. The jury may wonder why he kept his knee on the neck if the guy was dying of asphyxiation. First Aid for Dummies ("Stop the patient from possibly swallowing pills by closing his windpipe with a knee or elbow, then resuscitate the patient by three sharp blows to the neck, and keep pressure to stop any bleeding.") Probably his better defense is that he is the Flowers for Algernon guy and not smart enough to use limited force responsibly. Which a fair trial allows him to avoid arguing because he is hoping to win on the above.

Anonymous said...

I’m not following the trail I don’t like to follow trials but I’m not paid to follow but from what I’m hearing the toxicology reports might make this a case where a judge might be persuaded to direct the verdict.

Anonymous said...

Trial should be moved to North Sentinel Island in the Andaman Sea.