Judge Makes Key Evidentiary Rulings in George Floyd Trial

Everyone likely learned about the George Floyd case last year, with Derek Chauvin eventually charged with second-degree unintentional murder and second-degree manslaughter in connection with his death and his fellow police officers J. Alexander Kueng and Thomas Lane being charged with aiding and abetting second-degree murder. Their trial is scheduled to begin on March 8, 2021, and some evidentiary rulings could have a big impact on the case.

On Tuesday, Judge Peter A. Cahill deemed inadmissible evidence of (1) Floyd’s 2007 conviction for aggravated robbery in Texas; and (2) Floyd’s 2019 arrest in Minneapolis and the accompanying body camera footage depicting supposedly similar, evasive behavior with police. While Judge Cahill didn’t spell out its reasoning, presumably he ruled that way because the evidence didn’t fit under theory of admissibility under Minnesota Rule of Evidence 404(b), making the evidence inadmissible specific act evidence. of bad character under Minnesota Rule of Evidence 405(b). Judge Cahill also deemed much evidence of alleged misconduct by the police officers inadmissible, presumably under similar logic.

But Judge Cahill deemed one type of evidence admissible against Chauvin and another type of evidence conditionally admissible. First, the State sought to admit evidence that 

On June 25, 2017, Defendant [Chauvin] restrained an arrested female by placing his knee on her neck while she laid in prone position on the ground. Defendant shifted his body weight onto the female’s neck and continued to restrain the female in this position beyond the point when such force was needed under the circumstances.

Judge Cahill ruled that evidence of this incident was admissible, presumably to prove absence of mistake or accident in the death of George Floyd.  

Second, the State sought to admit evidence that

On August 22, 2015, Defendant [Chauvin] participated in rendering aid to a suicidal, intoxicated, and mentally-disturbed male. Defendant observed other officers fight with and tase the male. Defendant then observed other officers place the male in a side-recovery position, consistent with training. Defendant rode with the male to the hospital to receive medical care. Officers involved in the response received a commendation for their appropriate efforts and received feedback from medical professionals that, if officers had prolonged their detention of the male or failed to transport the male to the hospital in a timely manner, the male could have died.

Judge Cahill ruled that evidence of this incident will be admissible “provided the State presents clear and convincing evidence that Chauvin was present when a medical professional made the remarks summarized in the State’s offer of proof. Again, presumably this evidence was deemed admissible to prove absence of mistake or accident in the death of George Floyd.

(H/T Andrew Jurs)

-CM