Connect with us

Entertainment

The Shovin prosecutor’s office can not call the state of justice in America

MINAPOLIS, MINNESOTA - APRIL 20. People are reacting after the verdict was read during the trial of Derek Shavin on April 20, 2021 in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Former police officer Derek Shavin was convicted of second-degree murder, third-degree murder and second-degree murder for Death Floyd's death in 2020. On May 25. The video was released when Officer Chavin knelt in Floyd այդ # 39; The neck lasted nine minutes and twenty-two seconds, and protests began in the United States and around the world. Jurin found Shavin guilty on all three charges. (Photo by Scott Olson / Getty Images)

Minneapolis response after the April 20 indictment in the case of Derek Shavin. (Scott Olson / Getty Images)

President Biden, along with many of his fellow citizens and world leaders, welcomed the convictions in the Derek Chavin case. “This can be a huge step forward for the American justice march,” he said.

Convinced that the verdict of acquittal in the case was justice. But in general, it is wrong to see that individual persecutions are the bell tower of the state of justice. It relieves them of pressure that they are not satisfied with. Shavin’s verdict may be a catalyst for change in the police, but it should not be read as a fundamental turning point.

What Shavin did to George’s Floyd was uniquely disgusting. The prolonged strangulation of a man who posed no threat to police when Chovin killed him continued unabated three minutes after his death.

The prosecutors did a great job, and the defense, with a poor hand, did a poor job. Just believe your eyes, the prosecutors blocked the house. Shavin’s neck was a “possible factor” in Floyd’s death, according to Minnesota law, as well as evidence of hypertension or drug use by the defense.

The prosecution received very favorable instructions from the jury on the most serious charge of second-degree murder. The judge ordered the jury to plead guilty, even if they believed Shawn did not intend to inflict grievous bodily harm, which would have been one of Shawn’s strangely empty glances to interpret his almost coincidence when he strangled Floyd.

Sometimes the outcome of a trial shows that something rotten is ingrained in our justice system. It was well known that a number of justifications were made as a result of the pursuit of just civil rights in the South in the 1960s. But no courtroom decision should be taken as a signal of major social change. No verdict changes the paradigm.

We must be careful what we read in Shovin’s verdict, because any prosecution must be based only on the facts of the case, the law, no more, no less.

Jury trials are rigorous structural exercises aimed at achieving the truth of certain circumstances. The jurors hear and see evidence of two hypotheses of facts, each constrained to meet the standards of justice. They have to decide which one is right. It is quite difficult. We do not want them to act as social engineers or thought leaders too, going beyond a bigger problem or a shocking moment. We should hope that Shavin’s jury returned the guilty verdicts, as the defendant was clearly guilty, rather than presenting a broader point or moving the country in any direction.

We also need to be careful about the impact of the verdict, as the police’s pursuit of too much force is far more complex, far more damaging than the state of Minnesota v. Shavin.

In most cases of allegedly excessive use of force by the police, an officer threatens to kill in the heat of the moment, when they can justifiably claim fear. The members of the jury, of course, tend to give the police suspicion in these situations, which complicates the convictions. Fulfill the Unity Claim beyond a reasonable doubt և You can better understand the data collected by Bowling Green University researchers. Despite more than 13,000 fatal shootings by police officers since 2005, there have been only seven convictions for the killings.

The case of the next prominent թվ seemingly extreme force, which is very easy to go to trial, can end like the vast majority of others, without a conviction for murder. And if it is considered a proxy for a new level of justice, a proper police force, it will disappoint Americans as much as Shavin’s verdicts pushed us.

However, there is a way in which I think Shovin’s prosecution has signaled, perhaps even brought about, real changes. It demonstrated the remarkable willingness of Minneapolis officers to step up and condemn Shovin’s lawlessness. The land has moved, I think the police culture will not change.

For the rest of our hopes for reform, however, we need to look outside the criminal justice system for legislation such as the Flo Floyd Justice Act of 2021 (among other things, Los Angeles-based Karen Bass Bill bans certain police in practice directly), տի Department of Justice to strictly return the claim of intelligence powers to fraudulent agencies.

Atti General Merrick Garland canceled the sharp boundaries imposed on that government at the beginning of the Trump administration. Garland then acted swiftly to carry out the resuscitated powers, announcing an investigation by Minneapolis troops shortly after Shavin’s conviction on Monday in Louisville, where police killed Breonna Taylor without hitting 2020.

Shavin’s jury fairly enforced the law on matters that were of great importance to most Americans. But rather than Biden’s “giant step forward” response, I would be more inclined to respond to Canadian Prime Minister Just Astin Trudeau. He welcomed the verdict, but said it “still emphasizes that there is a lot of work to be done”.

@HarryLitman:

This story originally appeared in the Los Angeles Times.

Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *