a fair trial, Andrew Branca, antifa, AOC, BLM, Derek Chauvin, Due Process, Eric Nelson, Federal DOJ, fentanyl overdose, George Floyd, Jacob Frey, Judge Cahill, Mad Maxine Waters, Merrick Garland, Minnesota Supreme Court, State Department, Temporary President Biden, Tim Walz, US Supreme Court
The Holy, Social Justice Narrative, Book Of The Martyred Saint Floyd, Chapter 1: George Floyd, a man who wasn’t perfect, but was working very hard to get himself together with great success, and was doing nothing at all wrong, was accosted by four evil, white cops who racially profiled him, handcuffed him, and knelt on his neck for nine whole minutes, which cruelly killed him, while he pitifully cried for his mother and told them he couldn’t breath. They didn’t do anything to help him while innocent citizens pitifully and politely plead with them to save him.
And now, gentle readers, let us read from the book of reality, as provided by the evidence, much of it given by prosecution witnesses at trial. If you’ve been following my articles on this case, you know this, and much more, already. How many of your fellow Americans do you think know this? How many want to know it–would accept the truth if exposed to it?
*George Floyd was a misogynistic, violent felon and drug addict who, during his arrest, tried to hide illegal drugs by eating them, and in so doing, overdosed. He had done the same only a few months before.
*The police did not decide to accost an innocent Floyd, they were called because he tried to pass a counterfeit $20, passed out in the getaway Mercedes, and his co-conspirators, at least one of which was his drug dealer, couldn’t wake him.
*Floyd’s girlfriend and fellow addict testified that he was still using drugs, and had another incident of nearly killing himself with a Fentanyl overdose only months before he actually did kill himself with one. She also testified that Floyd called her “mother.” He was calling for her, not his biological mother, who passed away earlier.
*Multiple witnesses testified Floyd was foaming at the mouth and saying he couldn’t breath—it’s on the complete body camera footage–long before he was restrained on the ground—both classic symptoms of Fentanyl poisoning.
*Floyd, who was at least 6’4”, 230 pounds and very strong, violently resisted arrest and would not let the officers put him in a police vehicle. The largest officer present was Derek Chauvin at 5’9” and 140 pounds.
*Floyd himself begged to be put on the ground.
*Even multiple prosecution witnesses testified Chauvin did not put his knee on Floyd’s neck, but only on his shoulder and upper back, which caused the Prosecution to hastily change it’s claims about the cause of Floyd’s death.
*This restraint technique was not only taught at the MPD Academy—a slide illustrating it from that Academy was shown at trial—it was approved procedure, which was hastily changed after Floyd’s death.
*Evidence that Floyd had multiple health conditions that could have killed him at any moment, even absent a triple Fentanyl overdose, was presented at trial, and agreed to by prosecution witnesses, though one of them called a near total blockage of coronary arteries and a subsequently enlarged heart, also his fluid-filled lungs, a good thing(?!) that could not possibly have contributed to Floyd’s death. They also said a triple fatal dose of Fentanyl in Floyd’s blood could not have killed him because he was such a heavy user he was surely tolerant of it(?!).
*The officers had no idea of Floyd’s terribly fragile health, but called for an ambulance due to his obvious drug intoxication, twice within minutes.
*Despite Floyd’s violent struggles, the officers used far less force than they lawfully could have. Floyd showed no signs of injury or bruising, externally or internally, from their attempts to compel his cooperation.
*The crowd consistently grew, and became more hostile, and was verbally and physically aggressive. Multiple witnesses testified they had to physically restrain members of the crowd from attacking officers.
*So violent was the crowd, when the paramedics arrived, they took one look at them, and did a ‘load and scoot,” driving three blocks before it was safe for them to stop and deal with Floyd.
*During those three blocks, one of the officers, riding along, performed CPR on Floyd, hardly the actions of cops unconcerned for Floyd’s welfare.
*Floyd’s drug dealing crony, who tried to pass a counterfeit bill earlier, and was in the Mercedes with him, invoked the 5th, and refused to testify. He has not been charged with any crime and surely will not be.
*There was no evidence—none—Floyd’s race was a factor.
Among the things that dismay, but not surprise, me in the aftermath of the guilty verdict in the Derek Chauvin trial is how enormously effective the more than a year-long D/S/C narrative about the case remains. Canvassing the Internet, even sources that have reasonably well informed concerns about the case still believe, for example, Chauvin had his knee continually on George Floyd’s neck, and that’s what killed him. People who ought to know better bought that hook, line, and sinker and think the verdict just.
I need not, I trust, mention the continuing idiocy of Temporary President Biden who sees the trial, and fate of Chauvin, as a mere symbol of the need to banish the “systemic racism” he seeks with every rapidly diminishing fiber of his being. Chauvin’s conviction is not enough for D/S/Cs. Prison, for any cop, is a death sentence, but no, sooooo much more must be done to banish racism and white supremacy. No matter what they win, no matter how much they diminish liberty, it will never be enough.
I say I’m dismayed but not surprised because I realize few in the nation have taken the time to be accurately informed about the evidence in the case, and in this, I include the jury, who heard the evidence, who should know the narrative has always been a lie—every jot and tittle of it—but chose to embrace it. The facts I provided above are only a sampling of the evidence that obliterated the narrative. I’m well informed because I took the time to view video of the trial provided by the invaluable Andrew Branca. Even so, I did not view every minute as he did, but saw enough to find I agreed with his observations.
In the American system of justice, we try individuals for their actions, not organizations, not races, not institutions. We retain—at least in some places—the presumption of innocence, and must prove individuals guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The results of such trials must not be symbols of anything other than the guilt, or failure to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, of the people tried. If trials become symbolic of more than that, they’re political show trials, not the administration of blind justice. They’re social justice, which indicts and convicts entire classes of people across the continent of nothing more than being a police officer, or of upholding the Constitution and rule of law, or worse, of being born white and failing to admit and apologize for it.
The verdict in the Chauvin trial was actually a plea by the jurors not to reveal their identities, not to hurt them or their families, not to burn down their homes, and not to destroy their careers and lives. A lesser, included plea was not to burn Minneapolis to the ground.
I originally intended to deal in some depth with the closing arguments, but events have passed us by. Should you be interested, take the supplied links in this and the other articles in the Floyd archive, and you can see them in their entirety. Let us, rather, delve into next steps.
For a professional exposition of the sentencing options available, see this by Andrew Branca. The state, having convicted Chauvin on all counts, is not satisfied, and have filed for permission to punish Chauvin unto death. If convicts don’t kill him for being a cop, the state is determined to see he dies in prison of disease or old age. As we’ve seen, even that cannot possibly expiate our collective, white guilt. Sentencing is set for eight weeks from now, and the trials of the remaining three officers for the summer. No doubt, should the mob decide Chauvin’s punishment is insufficient—and what could possibly satisfy revolutionaries and criminals incapable of satisfaction?—Minneapolis and other cities will burn anew. We can expect no less should any of the remaining officers be acquitted or not sufficiently punished. Actually, what real cause do revolutionaries and criminals need?
Obviously, Eric Nelson will appeal the convictions. In a rational, just world, there should be a very good chance a new trial will be ordered, or even the convictions overturned, because Chauvin did not receive a fair trial. Even if one believes Chauvin should be convicted of something, it is more than fair, indeed, it is just and necessary, that all Americans be confident he was given a fair trial, and if not, he should be freed. After all, this is often done for the worst, most vicious felons, people about who there can be no doubt of their guilt. Whatever Chauvin might be, he is not that. What, then, are the grounds for an appeal?
From minutes after Floyd’s death, Minnesota politicians, from the boy Mayor of Minneapolis, Jacob Frey, to the idiotic governor, Tim Walz, proclaimed Chauvin a murderer and the narrative was constructed. The officers were arrested and charged within days, far too quickly for an investigation to be completed. For more than a year, other politicians, local, state and national, did the same, crying “racism!” and using the case for their political ends. The media too ensured the narrative, which judged Chauvin not only guilty of premeditated murder, but racism, was never out of the consciousness of the American people. How could it be, when that narrative sparked more than two billion dollars in damages, innumerable injuries, and even deaths? As Senator Sam Ervin once said:
A billion here, a billion there; pretty soon you’re talking real money.
The usual dimwitted celebrities added their inane commentary, and even a Japanese soldier from WWII emerging from a Pacific island cave would be sure to have been exposed to the narrative and to know, beyond any possible doubt or persuasion, Chauvin was a racist murderer.
Attorney Nelson moved for a change of venue at the beginning of the trial, and Judge Cahill denied that motion, commenting he didn’t believe, given the narrative’s universal distribution, a change of venue would make any difference(!). Consider that, gentle readers. The judge admitted it was impossible for Derek Chauvin to get a fair trial anywhere in Minnesota, so there was no point in moving the trial!
If that were not enough, the City announced a $27 million dollar, record-setting, settlement during the seating of the jury. There is absolutely no reason they could not have waited a few weeks until the verdict. Their announcement at that point could have one reason only: to influence any possible juror, and in so doing, to deny Derek Chauvin due process.
We must also consider the universal and hysterical news coverage, which became even more hysterical as the trial drew nearer. This too was unprecedented. So brazen was the commentary, one of the most common arguments was “we’ve seen the video; no trial is necessary.” Some supposed “legal commentators” even pushed that insane, anti-American argument.
Then there was California D/S/C Representative Mad Maxine Waters, who flew into Minneapolis just before the jury began to deliberate. She demanded police protection—consider the irony in that—to demand Chauvin’s head before an already angry mob:
We’re looking for a guilty verdict,’ Waters said. ‘And we’re looking to see if all of the talk that took place and has been taking place after they saw what happened to George Floyd, if nothing does not happen, then we know that we’ve got to not only stay in the street, but we’ve got to fight for justice,’ she said.
She also told the mob if they didn’t get what they wanted, they must become “more confrontational.” A short time later, in a drive by shooting, several National Guardsmen were injured, fortunately, not seriously. The shooter will be charged only with unlawful possession of a firearm. Such is the appreciation shown our military in the People’s Republic of Minnesota. “Minnesota nice.” Right. Unfortunately, Congressional Democrats, as usual, protected one of their own, and a censure motion against Waters was defeated.
As he should, Defense Attorney Nelson demanded a mistrial, which was promptly denied by Judge Cahill.
Today the defense in the Chauvin trial moved for a mistrial based on Water’s comments. The judge denied the mistrial motion, but noted it may be an issue on appeal and could lead to any conviction being overturned.
The Post Millenial reports:
‘I’ll give you that Congresswoman Waters may have given you something on appeal that may result in this whole trial being overturned.’
He said further that I’m aware that ‘Congresswoman Waters was talking specifically about this trial, and about the unacceptability of anything less than a murder conviction, and talking about being confrontational, but you can submit the press articles about that. This goes back to what I’ve been saying from the beginning: I wish that elected officials would stop talking about this case, especially in a manner that is disrespectful to the rule of law and the judicial branch and our function. I think if they want to give their opinions, they should do so in a respectful, and in a manner that is consistent with their commitment to the constitution, to respect the co-equal branch of government. Their failure to do so is abhorrent, but I don’t think it has prejudiced us with additional material that would prejudice this jury. They have been told not to watch the news and I trust that they are following these instructions and that there is not in any way a prejudice…
‘A congresswoman’s opinion really doesn’t matter a whole lot,’ Cahill concluded, and denied the motion for a mistrial.
Consider that: Judge Cahill, on the record, admitted Water’s actions should be grounds for overturning the verdict. If he believed that, why didn’t he simply declare a mistrial? I’ll get to that shortly. In the meantime, take this link to see Prof. Alan Dershowitz’s opinion of Water’s political theater.
Oh, but there is much, much more. Temporary President Biden, speaking before the verdict, publically all but called for Chauvin’s execution, saying it was proper because the jury was sequestered. He went further:
President Joe Biden reached out to the family of George Floyd on Monday, the White House confirmed.
Biden spoke with the family to ‘check in with them and also share that the family was in his prayers,’ White House press secretary Jen Psaki confirmed on social media.
His “prayers” were for Chauvin’s conviction for murder.
Biden also met with the Floyd family during the 2020 presidential campaign as violent protests and looting swept across some of America’s major cities.
In a campaign speech after the meeting, Biden vowed justice for the family.
‘I promise you, we’ll do everything in our power to see to it that justice is had for your brother, your cousin’s case,’ he said, speaking to the family.
Biden described Floyd’s killing as an ‘act of brutality’ and called for all Americans to ‘grapple’ with their “complacency” on issues of police shootings.
‘Nothing about this will be easy or comfortable, but if we simply allow this wound to scab over once more without treating the underlying injury, we’ll never truly heal,’ he said at the time. ‘The very soul of America is at stake.’
The White House said Monday that Biden would likely speak to the nation after the jury in the Chauvin trial delivered their verdict.
And so he did, once again proclaiming America a land full of “systemic racism,” and again vowing to stamp it out, Chauvin’s conviction being only a tiny, first step in that noble process. The boy mayor of Minneapolis also couldn’t stay silent:
Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey said George Floyd was killed ‘at the hands of the police,’ no matter what verdict is reached in the trial of the former cop charged in his death.
‘As we await the verdict, there are several inescapable truths,’ Frey, a Democrat, told reporters. ‘Over this last year, our twin cities have experienced a barrage of trauma, all culminating with this trial and then the verdict. There’s been pain and anguish, anguish and frustration that is undoubtedly acutely felt by our black and brown communities.’
He added: ‘Regardless of the outcome of this trial, regardless of the decision made by the jury, there is one true reality, which is that George Floyd was killed at the hands of the police.’
We must also remember the courthouse, surrounded by concrete barriers, fences, barbed wire, innumerable police and National Guardsmen and even armored vehicles. The jury was swept past that every day, while passing miles of burned out, shuttered businesses, and the hurried barricading of the remaining open businesses, as well as the closing of Minneapolis schools, to say nothing of the continuing “demonstrations” and mob threats and violence.
Nelson made many requests for jury sequestration, but was always denied. And then, in Brooklyn Center, a mere ten miles from the courthouse, during the trial, a police officer accidentally killed a black felon, and riots broke out anew, there, in Minneapolis, and across the nation.
All of this, and more, every member of the jury saw, knew, and took to heart.
We should also consider the prosecution’s unethical barrage of exculpatory materials, thousand of pages, during the trial. Considering the prosecution had between 12-15 lawyers working the case, and Nelson was by himself, this can only have been a purposeful tactic to overwhelm and confuse Nelson, and thereby deny Chauvin due process.
Let us also consider what Andrew Branca calls “the 3-minute-plus ‘Restraint While Pulseless’ big lie.”
One of the foundations of our criminal justice system is that prosecutors not be focused on winning, on convictions, but on doing justice. To that end, they are not allowed—ever—to lie to the court or the jury, yet it is common, and often overlooked. Such lying is even worse when it is done during the prosecution’s rebuttal to the Defense closing argument, when the Defense has no opportunity to correct the record before the jury begins deliberations. That’s exactly what happened in the Chauvin trial.
It’s become common to see claims on the internet that Derek Chauvin continued to restrain Floyd as long as three or even four minutes after he knew Floyd no longer had a pulse. And it’s not just the internet, it’s the actual prosecutors, as well. This is what Prosecutor Blackwell said in his closing rebuttal just yesterday:
Why is it necessary to continue applying deadly restraint to a man who is defenseless? Who is handcuffed? Who is not resisting? Who is not breathing? Who doesn’t have a pulse? And go on and do that for another three plus minutes before the ambulance shows up? And then they continue doing it. How is that a reasonable exercise in the use of force?
The handcuffing of Floyd, Floyd’s cessation of breathing, Officer Kueng’s inability to find a pulse, are all events that took place at different times—obviously, Floyd was handcuffed a considerable period of time before the officers had reason to believe he was not breathing or couldn’t find a pulse.
Fortunately, we can know the exact times that various events happened, from the various video footage, particularly the body worn camera (BWC) footage of the various officers, whose BWC time stamps are all synchronized.
Prosecutor Blackwell claimed the officers knew Floyd was not breathing for more than three minutes and did nothing to help him. Branca provides a time stamped transcript that proves this a blatant, prejudicial lie. It was not a matter of a differing, honest interpretation of the evidence; it was a lie. The prosecutors, all 12-15 of them, had the same evidence provided by Branca. By all means, take the link and see for yourself. Nelson did object, but was continually overruled by Judge Cahill, who allowed more than 20 instances of blatant lying by Blackwell on rebuttal.
It is a virtual certainly, however, the Minnesota Supreme Court will not order a new trial, or overturn the verdict. That court is among the most leftist in the nation, and no one in Minnesota wants to try that case again, justice be damned. It will ultimately fall to the US Supreme Court, and that court seems quite uninterested in justice these days, even though it would be hard to imagine a case more ripe for reversal than this. A great many of the most vile and murderous criminals in history have seen their cases overturned on far less than this. Unfortunately, Derek Chauvin is a white cop. For his like, there is only social, racial justice.
A few words on Judge Cahill. His was an unenviable role. He, like the jury, knew the consequences of an acquittal, personally and for the city. From the beginning of the trial, he put, on the record, substantial commentary that would aid an appeal, even as he failed to do his duty. Did he do this because it was all he could do? Because he knew he could not do anything to assist the Defense? Because he knew he could never declare a mistrial, regardless of the cause?
Derek Chauvin’s, and the Minneapolis PD’s, troubles are far from over. The Federal DOJ will surely investigate him and prosecute him for violating Floyd’s civil rights. They will ensure, regardless of any sentence handed down in Minnesota, Chauvin will never breathe free air again. AG Merrick Garland also announced the DOJ is investigating the MPD. This was to be expected. The Obama DOJ forced ruinous consent decrees on many police departments, and the Harris DOJ will do much, much worse.
Final Thoughts: tomorrow, I’ll provide an article on the effect this trial and verdict will have on American policing. For now, we can be certain the narrative, not due process, prevailed. We can be certain there was more than enough reasonable doubt for an acquittal on all charges, but the jury, in its incredible rush to judgment, did not consider the law or the evidence. They saw the video. Prosecutor Blackwell told them to ignore the law and the evidence, and to believe the video, to believe their eyes. He gave them the perfect excuse. They knew the consequences, personally and for the city and nation, if they acquitted Chauvin. What more did they need? What else could they do?
Will we, sometime in the future, hear jurors admit this? Unlikely. Their names are going to be leaked. Mobs are going to show up at their homes. They are going to be as quiet as possible and hope nothing happens to them. How could any of them possibly admit their verdict was anything but a painstakingly considered result of a careful examination of the law and the evidence, though coming to that verdict took virtually no time at all?
There is one thing about which we can be certain: this narrative, this trial, this verdict has done, and will do, serious damage to our republic, and our Temporary President and his handlers are poised to make the most—worst–of it.
UPDATE, 04-21-21 2100 MT: Well, at least Biden has kept his promise about making every department of government focused on race, as Breitbart reports:
[Ned Price, State Department spokesthug said:] The outcome does not represent full justice, but it does represent accountability, which is a step towards dealing with institutional racism in America. The verdict also does not diminish the pain felt by black and brown communities, which is a deep trauma to which people of color and marginalized communities around the world can relate.
But that wasn’t nearly enough, no. Price had to parrot the Chinese Communists and attack America:
As the secretary [of State] said, America finds strength in the fact that we’re able to acknowledge our imperfections transparently and to grapple with them openly. It’s what sets us apart from our competitors and our adversaries and what allows us to advance the ideal of a more perfect union.
Just as we defend human rights and hold human rights abusers accountable around the world, we will continue to strive to address racial injustice, and inequities in our country, affirming throughout that black lives truly do matter.
What the hell is the State Department doing commenting on any domestic criminal case? From who will we hear next? The Department of Agriculture? The IRS? The National Park Service?
And in case anyone harbored any misconceptions about Temporary President Biden and his handlers being actual Americans:
President Joe Biden believes the bar for convicting police officers is far too high and supports efforts to change that, the White House press secretary said on Wednesday.
‘He believes the bar for convicting officers is far too high. It needs to be changed. He’s a strong supporter of the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act,’ press secretary Jen Psaki said.
It’s that damned due process, isn’t it? All right–left–thinking people know cops and Normal Americans have no right to that, or that whole outmoded, so-called “Bill of Rights.”
“Let justice be done, though the heavens fall.”
They refused to do justice, and the country will suffer terribly for it.
Mike McDaniel said:
I hope we can yet step back from the precipice, but this sort of thing is not encouraging.
I’ve been hoping that for years, and it just seems to intensify. Drat it all.
Mike McDaniel said:
I’ve been hoping they weren’t so stupid as to provoke Normal Americans to preserve their liberties, but they seem to be just that stupid.
*Wry* Cluster B personality disorders. They ARE that stupid. They literally cannot imagine someone would choose to become fed up with their… bull.
It’s something unfortunate therapists trying to “treat” these people (usually because a relative says “not dealing with you any more otherwise”) run into all the time. People that self-absorbed simply cannot grasp the concept that other people might decide they don’t have to put up with abuse anymore. It always surprises the abusers. Always.
Mike McDaniel said:
What you said.
Just curious…. given Chauvin’s supervisors and Chief and others have presumably defied the “blue wall” and did not side with Chauvin’s actions, various chiefs and rank-in-file officers around the country also not siding with Chauvin, even the Fraternal Order of Police not siding with Chauvin… has the Chauvin case managed to split and/or divide police nationwide?
Mike McDaniel said:
Visit on Friday for an article that may provide some insight into that. For the moment, keep in mind we’re dealing with a red/blue split in policing. The horrific troubles we’re seeing–or manufacturing–are occurring almost exclusively in large, blue cities and states. There is always a split between the rank and file and administrators, largely because, particularly in big cities no one gets administrative positions without being unfailingly loyal to the politicians that make the appointments. Such people are almost always far less interested in ethical, colorblind policing than in keeping their perks and supporting political narratives.
God forgive the cowardly jury. I certainly won’t.
Mike McDaniel said:
Dear rural counsel:
Agreed, though I can at least understand their reluctance to be brave considering where they live, and how the leaders for whom they voted continue to deprive the law-abiding of peace and protection. On second thought…