I think I have made my personal opinions on the trial of the decade well known. Despite my position, I’m of the opinion that there will be an acquittal- at least for the most serious charges.
When you are in court with a person for 8 hours a day, day on ends, you become aware of a persons mannerisms and general behavior. By the end of this trial, the jury will have been acquainted with all parties for nearly an entire month.
At this point, jurors wouldn’t see Chauvin as a monster. They would view the prosecution as overly aggressive (which they were), with an unfair advantage of 6 versus 1 defense attorney.
The tag teaming, coupled with the fact that the defense attorney isn’t a show boater, works in the defenses favor.
Then there are the prosecution’s witnesses. The one pictured below tried to play the smart ass angle, attempting to make the defense attorney look like he didn’t know what he was talking about. Instead, she came off as a complete moron who didn’t know her own subject matter. Her testimony is perhaps the most grating of anyone who took the stand during this trial.
Other expert witnesses were great – when questions were asked that did not include the proper terminology, they asked clarifying questions, or answered in a way to make the answer clear. This demonstrated they not only knew their field, but were able to teach laymen.
Part of me doesn’t believe the prosecution wanted to succeed. It’s either that or they were desperate. Let’s examine the conspiratorial route. Prosecutors have a vested interest in trying those whom the police have deemed worthy of prosecution (criminals). This stands even when less than ethical means were used by the police. In effect, they have an interest in allowable tolerances when it comes to excessive use of force.
There is no reason to be desperate for a conviction. Riots will occur regardless. Chauvin is also subject to federal charges for both his tax troubles and for his actions with Floyd (yes, feds and state can charge you for the same crime on the same facts now Thanks to conservatives on the Supreme Court). Despite this, the prosecution acted in a way that nearly resulted in mistrial twice.