On Monday, lawyers for Derek Chauvin, the former Minneapolis Police officer charged in the death of George Floyd, requested to move his trial out of Hennepin County.
Their request came after the city of Minneapolis announced on Friday a $27 million settlement in a wrongful death lawsuit filed in federal court by Floyd’s family. They reasoned that in the midst of jury selection, news of the settlement — hard to avoid given the attention on the case, even for people instructed to avoid media coverage — could influence jurors’ opinions.
“You have elected officials — the governor, the mayor — making incredibly prejudicial statements about my client, this case,”defense attorney Eric Nelson said in court. “You have the city settling a civil lawsuit for a record amount of money. And the pre-trial publicity is just so concerning.”
[image_caption]Judge Peter Cahill[/image_caption]
If he were to grant the request, it would be a rare example of it happening in Minnesota.
Few cases in Minnesota
Under both the Minnesota and the U.S. constitutions, people facing criminal prosecution have the right to a speedy trial by an impartial jury in the jurisdiction where the crime was committed.
Over the years, courts have interpreted the “impartial” part of this to include moving the trial if it’s determined that the accused can’t get a fair one in the location where the crime was committed. This is usually because the case has brought so much publicity that potential jurors are likely to have formed opinions about it ahead of time.
Several high-profile trials in the last century have featured changes in venue: In 1992, the police officers charged with beating Rodney King were tried — and mostly acquitted — in Simi Valley, an almost all-white suburb of Los Angeles, the city where the beating actually happened. And in 1996, the federal case against Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh was held in Denver, Colorado instead of Oklahoma City.
The most recent Minnesota case to see a change of venue is likely 2015’s State v. Fitch, which concerned a man accused, and later convicted, of killing a Mendota Heights police officer at a traffic stop in 2015.
In Fitch, the defense asked to change the venue because, it argued, the media coverage surrounding the case would make an impartial jury impossible in the Twin Cities. It had commissioned a survey that found 91 percent of Dakota County residents knew about the case and 83 percent thought defendant Brian Fitch was probably or definitely guilty, per the Star Tribune. The trial was moved to St. Cloud.
[image_credit]REUTERS/Jane Rosenberg[/image_credit][image_caption]Defense attorney Eric Nelson introducing Derek Chauvin to potential jurors during jury selection.[/image_caption]
Defense lawyers for Jeronimo Yanez, the police officer who shot Philando Castile in 2016 and not found guilty of murder, requested to move the trial on the grounds that publicity in Ramsey County would make it hard to find an impartial jury. That request was denied.
As in the Yanez case, Chauvin’s attorneys initially asked Judge Cahill to move the trial due to publicity surrounding the case, but the judge denied the request in November.
[image_caption]Jeronimo Yanez[/image_caption]
Considerations on appeal
Cahill is expected to rule on the request for a change of venue Friday and is also expected to rule this week on the defense’s request to postpone the trial to let news of the settlement die down.
If the change of venue isn’t granted, David Schultz, a visiting professor of law at the University of Minnesota, said there is some chance that if there’s a guilty verdict and an appeal, a higher court could declare that Chauvin did not get a fair trial given the publicity surrounding the trial in Minneapolis.
[image_caption]Former Chief Hennepin County Public Defender Mary Moriarty[/image_caption]
Moriarty doesn’t think keeping the trial in Hennepin County would necessarily be grounds for an appeal, though. For one, she said, it’s not clear whether the settlement announcement will help the defense or the prosecution.
She also noted that Cahill is re-interviewing jurors to determine whether the news reached them and what they make of it.
Chauvin’s trial is happening in a time when it’s really hard to insulate jurors from learning about the case, Moriarty said. Even though jurors were instructed to avoid news of the trial, that’s all but impossible with social media and other ubiquitous forms of communication.
“[Cahill] has ordered the jurors not to tell anybody they’re on this trail, and not to do any research on it or try to expose themselves, but as you saw or heard [Monday], a man got excused, because in his workplace break room, there was a TV on all the time,” she said.
Given the publicity around the case, it’s also impossible to prevent people from talking to jurors about the news, especially given they’re not supposed to tell people they’re potential jurors in the case.
Another consideration for Cahill is the logistical challenge of moving the trial, Moriarty said. Witnesses, of which there are many, would have to travel to appear in court. Plus, there are COVID-19 accommodations, like plexiglass and social distancing that she thinks few Minnesota courtrooms could make.
“I suspect the Court of Appeals, or any appellate, would say this is extremely unfortunate, it is really bad timing, but under the circumstances, what Judge Cahill did was appropriate,” she said.
Correction: This article has been corrected to accurately state the location the bus crash trial was moved to. The trial moved to Kandiyohi County.
It’s the old defense game of trying to put the victim on trial; a sign that they have no good defense for Chauvin’s actions.
There is no question about what he did — it’s on video.
So the only question is what he’ll be convicted of, which boils down to motivation.
Even more rare, I would hope, is the spectacle of an unarmed black man’s neck beneath the knee of a white policeman over the matter of a lousy 20-dollar bill. So there’s that.
Still, I’m trying to understand why the city and family couldn’t wait six weeks to announce the civil settlement. I’d love to know whose idea this was.
I imagine the city didn’t want to wait six weeks because the payout would have been higher. Settle early, settle for a lower amount. OJ was acquitted in a criminal trial but still open to a civil trial.
Exactly. And for the Floyd family, they run the risk of the value going down with an acquittal. Both sides minimized the risk. Bad timing for the criminal case, but very logical timing for the civil case.
It is written in the Constitution that citizens get a fair trial. Which in this case is literally impossible in the State of Minnesota. Even the Judge said yesterday he wished the government ( Mayor, Prosecutor and now the City Council ) would stop talking in public about this case. This timing of this award speaks volumes about their intentions.
Do not be surprised if Judge Cahill moves this out of the state on Friday. Should he choose not to, this will be automatic grounds for an appeal. Those in power in this case are so smug they make me sick.
He cannot move the case out of the state. Since this is a prosecution brought by the State of Minnesota, the trial must be held in Minnesota.
While I agree that the civil settlement disclosure was completely foolish, I do not agree this case will leave the state of Minnesota. I am not aware of any state case that gets moved to another state, it would disturb the laws of jurisdiction completely. (the McVeigh case noted was a Federal case) Any move would be to another Minnesota county, but I fail to see how a jury in most of the outstate counties could be constituted without hurting the prosecution. This case is so high profile that its just going to be hard to find truly impartial jurors.
That is correct. The idea that it would be moved out of state is complete nonsense.
“Those in power” in this case would be Derek Chauvin. The law specifically shields an officer in his position from responsibility for an act of clear impunity; the criminal standard of proof is exceedingly challenging; and the probability that there will be at least one juror ideologically committed to his acquittal without regard to the evidence is extremely high. One infers that you’re not referring to Chauvin, but it’s unclear to whom you could be referring.
The city council’s settlement, and the announcement of it, are deeply problematic, but they certainly aren’t acts of “those in power.”
I will be very surprised if this case is moved out state. Because there is no legal basis whatsoever to do that. The case is in Minnesota state court not federal court. The idea of the case moving out of state is complete nonsense. If the case gets moved, it will be to a different county in Minnesota.
There is nowhere in the state that has been immune from pretrial publicity about this case. It would be impossible to get away from it.
The only reason for the defense to want to move the trial would be the perception that a predominantly white jury pool would be more sympathetic to a police officer who was dealing with “one of those people from the cities.” Sadly, I don’t think that perception would be entirely unjustified.
So this would be the “Simi Valley” change of venue equivalent?
Exactly.
if this case doesn’t qualify for a change of venue, no case does, Walz declared Chauvin guilty of murder before seeing all the evidence hours after it happened, so did Frey ( a lawyer who you would think would know better) and in a settlement before a trial even determines who did what and is responsible the city gives out a record settlement, in effect saying their employee was guilty, add in media and prosecutor shennanigan’s, it’s practically a kangaroo court
There’s a video showing that sub human murdering an innocent man, so that the Gov called him guilty, well, that video says it all don’t ya think. Or maybe you’re one of those sympathizers who watch that video and thought, no, that 9 minutes didn’t kill him, must have been drugs, or …
Utter nonsense. As a lawyer myself, I can tell you there is no reason whatsoever for Frey to know better. There is a video of the murder. He was right to say it.
And the city was going to pay a huge settlement regardless of the trial outcome. Its a much lower standard.
Mistrial.
That’s where my moneys at.
The choice made by Minneapolis city officials to settle the civil case during jury selection was certainly an interesting one. I do wonder what they had in mind. It does reflect a willingness by our city leaders to complicate the prosecution of Minneapolis police officers. It shows that their priorities are different from those who are prosecuting the former officers.
The prosecution of the Minneapolis police officers is a reasonable doubt case. I suggest that anything that complicates the prosecution, raises the level of doubt toward the reasonable.
It reminds me of the great legal movie “A Few Good Men”, written by Aaron Sorkin. It’s a Tom Cruise movie but the prosecution is very effectively brought by an excellent Kevin Bacon. In his opening statement, Bacon talks about how the defense, led by Cruise will want to put on a show casting blame on a number of figures including officers. What Bacon does is state is argument simply, with the refrain “These are the facts. And they are undisputed.” I don’t know whether the prosecution in the police officer can or should really do much more than say, “These are the facts. And they are undisputed.”