The Test

In 2019, after former Minneapolis police officer Mohamed Noor was convicted of 3rd degree murder and manslaughter in the death of Justine Damond, a very deserved conviction, I said on my radio show "Now we see what it takes for a Minneapolis cop to be convicted of clearly murdering a citizen of the city.  They have to be black."

Noor was Somali-American and while I don't necessarily want to get into the detail of his case, I made the comment back then "what happens from this point forward when a white cop is found to have done a comparable crime, or even worse, and we have undeniable evidence of the white cop's guilt?  If that white cop get's convicted of their crime, then (although it can clearly be labeled 'minor incremental change') it would show all cops can be held accountable for their crimes.  If the white cop gets found not guilty, then we know the only way the public will get justice is if the officer involved in the crime wasn't white."

A little more than a year later, former Minneapolis cop Derek Chauvin (who is very white and looks like a villain in a Spielberg film) was filmed crushing George Floyd to death on Chicago Avenue in south Minneapolis.  He drove his knee into the neck of Floyd, who was handcuffed and displayed minimal resistance, FOR THE 9 MINUTES AND 29 SECONDS CHAUVIN HAD HIM PINNED.  Most of the time the Minneapolis cops were piled on top of Floyd, he was already dead. 

As the jury now begins to determine Chauvin's guilt as it takes over the case from the court, the test I alluded to in 2019 begins. 

Let's just cut the crap. Chauvin is guilty.  He's guilty of all three charges against him, 2nd degree murder (unintentional), 3rd degree murder, and 2nd degree manslaughter.  The prosecution in the case MORE THAN proved their case.  They showed the video, they brought in the eyewitnesses who pleaded with the officers to stop killing Floyd, they talked to the emergency responders who realized they were called to a murder scene, they presented the senior members of the Minneapolis PD who all called Chauvin's actions out of line and inexcusable, they talked to Chauvin's trainers who all insisted Chauvin was trained to never do what he did, and they brought in medical experts who (using the video itself and science) proved the cause of George Floyd's death was the officers killing him, mainly Chauvin.

Meanwhile the defense sounded incompetent at times. They so wanted to character assassinate Floyd, vilify the witnesses, and dismiss the experts, but every time they tried they sounded ill prepared and desperate. Their own witnesses not only didn't display any evidence which contradicted reality, they were picked apart  by a far better prosecution team who even had the defense witnesses backing up their version of what happened. 

And then there is the video, all 9 minutes and 29 seconds of it.

Yet the outcome of this trial is far from galvanized.  I find it next to impossible to think the jury would vote not guilty on the manslaughter charge, but a lot of legal experts have said the convictions on 2nd and 3rd degree murder are not guaranteed. 

Police in Minnesota benefit from two things.  The first is police accountability rules written by Republicans which basically create a zero accountability standard for police (unless you're a black officer).  All any police officer has to do is scream "I was SCARED(!)" and it becomes near impossible to convict them in Minnesota. 

I've often made this analogy: A Minnesota cop could be off duty, drunk as a skunk in a bar.  They could go up to someone and say "I hate you and I'm going to go get my gun and shoot you!" They then, drunk, drive home, get their weapon, drive back to the bar and raise their gun at the person they threatened.  At that point the soon to be victim raises his hands to attempt to surrender but is shot and killed by the off duty drunk cop.  It doesn't matter the intent, recklessness or premeditation of the situation, all the officer has to do is scream "I was SCARED when the victim raised their hands, and I feared for my life."  Under that specific scenario, there's a 50/50 chance the Minnesota cop walks free.

Insanity!

Chauvin's lawyers have tried to modify the "I was SCARED(!)" argument. They have insisted the crowd begging the officers to get off of Floyd were scaring them (even though they never threatened the officers and there were five officers on the scene, including one specifically doing crowd control). They also implied Floyd had to be subdued like he was because at any moment he could become bequest with super strength and throw the officers off of him like he was the Hulk.  Neither of those defenses seemed to work on the jury.

The other benefit to white Minnesota cops (and all white cops for that matter) is there's a substantial portion of the population who'll never convict a white police officer of a crime. No matter the evidence, they just won't do it.  For some it has to do with a family member who is/were an officer, but for most it's a more evil internal decision.  Cops keep bad guys in line, and for most of these people 'bad guys' can be defined as Black, Latino, Hispanic, Native American, Asian, Liberal, LGBTQ and any other group they dislike.  They might not like the tactics they use, but they tolerate them because of who is being abused by the police's heavy handed approach.

The defense also tried their hardest to tap into any juror who might share these thoughts.  Not only did they focus on George Floyd's drug use (even though there wasn't enough drugs in his system to warrant any concern), but the entire closing argument was a buffet of excuses for a pro-cop juror to lean their wrongful non-guilty assertions against.

For goodness sake!  The defense's argument is Floyd didn't die of being crushed into the pavement, but rather of an enlarged heart, CO emissions from a car, non-existent drugs in his system and paramedics who should've gotten to the scene faster.  Only a cop apologist would find such a ludicrous argument feasible.  It'd be like saying "sure the shark ate him, but in reality he died of cancer seconds before being eaten. THAT was the real cause of death." 

Crazy.

But yet here we are, wondering what the jury will find Chauvin guilty of, if anything.  If 'not guilty' is read repeatedly when it comes to the verdict, I feel this city (and this country) will explode with anger.  If 'guilty' is read three times, I think this city will become the sight of the largest dance party in history.

Either way we'll have a definitive answer to the test.