LAL #004 — The Chauvin Trial (Part II)

Law and Legitimacy

After two days of trial in the Derek Chauvin case, folks kept asking me: What's going on? Why isn't the defense objecting to the "expert" testimony of the mixed martial arts (MMA) fact witness, Donald Wynn Williams? I explore trial strategy and tactics in this podcast. I won't pretend to know what is on the mind of Derek Chauvin's lead counsel, Eric Nelson. But I will say this: Nelson is a pro. Odds are, he's letting the state set a scene that helps provide further support for the argument that, given the totality of the circumstances, the police officers behaved reasonably in the moments before George Floyd's death. How so? An angry crowd was gathering as Chauvin leaned on Floyd using a technique he had been trained to use. Does Chauvin look distracted and inattentive to Floyd? Perhaps he had a wary eye on a gathering mob chanting things like "bum" and "tough guy" at the officers. Williams testified he watched what he thought was a murder, but it didn't anger him. Jurors could rightly regard the witness less than objective. I also discuss the video most folks who talk about the trial haven't bothered to watch and which, once the jury watches it, will likely settle the case—it's the full 45-minute recording of the police encounter with Floyd. Watch it. Then ask yourself, what, exactly, should officers have done with Floyd? The prosecution set itself a high burden—proving unreasonable force. I doubt they can do it, unless the jury, barricaded in a courthouse and no doubt aware of hijinks on the courthouse steps, compromises and gives those who have not seen all the evidence a little something for their outrage.

--- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/norm-pattis/support