Chauvin Murder Trial

[Rev. Rye]

I never thought it would be controversial to state that jurors shouldn't fear for their safety.

That's not what you were saying. You were saying the trial was tainted because the jury feared for their lives. That is controversial as well as unsupported.

And just so we're clear about this, here's something IA said a little less than 24 hours ago:

No. It just raises questions about whether a fair trial was ever possible.

With or without the political baggage, we had EIGHT current and former police officers explaining that the force Chauvin used on Floyd (six from the MPD, and four officers who specialise in figuring out the exact sort of force needed to subdue a perp), and six doctors and chemists who explained that it was that excessive force that killed Floyd and not his fentanyl use, demolishing the defense's arguments before they took to the stand, and when the defense finally did, the best thing they could say was "does not!" or that maybe it was Carbon Monoxide poisoning from the exhaust of the car that shouldn't even be pushing out exhaust because it's a hybrid Ford Explorer that was idling. And that's not even mentioning the multiple videos filmed of the incident.

The evidence alone should have sealed this case. Anyone who could see all that and conclude that maybe Derek Chauvin wasn't guilty from the evidence alone was likely Hell-bent on acquitting him in the first place.