Aiding & abetting 2nd degree murder
https://twitter.com/Porter_Anderson/status/1268262875619110913?s=19
https://twitter.com/Porter_Anderson/status/1268262875619110913?s=19
Former federal prosecutor Renato Marrioti provides some early review of the latest charges:
THREAD: What should we make of news that the officer who killed #GeorgeFloyd will be charged with second-degree murder and that the other officers will be charged with aiding and abetting the murder?
1/ To prove that Chauvin was guilty of second-degree murder, prosecutors will have to prove that he intended to kill Floyd.
To prove the other officers aided and abetted Floyd’s murder, they’ll have to prove the officers knew Chauvin was murdering Floyd and helped him succeed.
2/ It will be challenging to prove those charges beyond a reasonable doubt based solely on the video footage.
Chauvin will argue that even if he got carried away in the heat of the moment and intended to hurt Floyd, he didn’t intentionally kill him.
3/ The video alone doesn’t prove Chauvin’s intent, although prosecutors will argue that the manner in which he killed Floyd does.
His actions were gruesome and the sheer amount of time he choked Floyd can support an inference of intent to kill.
4/ But “proof beyond a reasonable doubt” is a very high standard, and it’s possible a jury wouldn’t unanimously conclude that he intentionally killed Floyd based on the video alone.
5/ Third-degree murder is provable based solely on the video, because it requires killing without regard for the sanctity of human life.
The ability of prosecutors to obtain a conviction for 2nd degree murder (rather than 3rd) will depend on the other evidence they’ve gathered.
6/ The other officers will argue that they were bystanders and that while they didn’t stop Chauvin, and should have done so, they didn’t actually help him.
It’s possible they aided him later by making false statements verbally or in police reports.
7/ This is a technical argument that won’t appeal to many jurors, who will condemn the officers for not preventing the murder of Floyd. If those officers make that argument, they could ask for a bench trial, because a judge would be more focused on technical legal points.
8/ Ultimately whether convictions of the other officers are obtained also depend on the other evidence gathered during the investigation.
No matter what, obtaining convictions of the officers won’t be easy. Hopefully this case sparks needed reform.
9/ It is too difficult to hold police accountable for crimes and other serious misconduct, and we need to rethink how we regulate law enforcement more generally. /end
ADDENDUM: It looks like this will be charged as felony murder, which requires them to prove that this was a felony battery and that the killing of Floyd was during the commission of that other felony.
That will be easier to prove than proving that he intentionally killed Floyd.
THREAD: What should we make of news that the officer who killed #GeorgeFloyd will be charged with second-degree murder and that the other officers will be charged with aiding and abetting the murder?
1/ To prove that Chauvin was guilty of second-degree murder, prosecutors will have to prove that he intended to kill Floyd.
To prove the other officers aided and abetted Floyd’s murder, they’ll have to prove the officers knew Chauvin was murdering Floyd and helped him succeed.
2/ It will be challenging to prove those charges beyond a reasonable doubt based solely on the video footage.
Chauvin will argue that even if he got carried away in the heat of the moment and intended to hurt Floyd, he didn’t intentionally kill him.
3/ The video alone doesn’t prove Chauvin’s intent, although prosecutors will argue that the manner in which he killed Floyd does.
His actions were gruesome and the sheer amount of time he choked Floyd can support an inference of intent to kill.
4/ But “proof beyond a reasonable doubt” is a very high standard, and it’s possible a jury wouldn’t unanimously conclude that he intentionally killed Floyd based on the video alone.
5/ Third-degree murder is provable based solely on the video, because it requires killing without regard for the sanctity of human life.
The ability of prosecutors to obtain a conviction for 2nd degree murder (rather than 3rd) will depend on the other evidence they’ve gathered.
6/ The other officers will argue that they were bystanders and that while they didn’t stop Chauvin, and should have done so, they didn’t actually help him.
It’s possible they aided him later by making false statements verbally or in police reports.
7/ This is a technical argument that won’t appeal to many jurors, who will condemn the officers for not preventing the murder of Floyd. If those officers make that argument, they could ask for a bench trial, because a judge would be more focused on technical legal points.
8/ Ultimately whether convictions of the other officers are obtained also depend on the other evidence gathered during the investigation.
No matter what, obtaining convictions of the officers won’t be easy. Hopefully this case sparks needed reform.
9/ It is too difficult to hold police accountable for crimes and other serious misconduct, and we need to rethink how we regulate law enforcement more generally. /end
ADDENDUM: It looks like this will be charged as felony murder, which requires them to prove that this was a felony battery and that the killing of Floyd was during the commission of that other felony.
That will be easier to prove than proving that he intentionally killed Floyd.
The dumbest people in the world sit on juries - anyone with any intelligence never shows up for the selection in the first place - now you've got some smooth talking attorney convince these idiots that just watched a video with their own eyes that they saw something different
The 3 being charged with aiding and abetting - who knows? the one cop never even touched the guy - he just kept the crowd at bay
