Supreme Court Rejects Appeal of Former Officer Convicted in George Floyd Killing

Improve the News Foundation -

Facts

  • The US Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal by former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin on Monday for his conviction for the murder of George Floyd.1
  • The justices rejected Chauvin's appeal that he filed after a Minnesota appellate court upheld his 2021 murder conviction and rejected his request for a new trial. His lawyers argued that jury bias and the past rulings of the preceding judge deprived Chauvin of a fair trial.2
  • Chauvin has claimed that new evidence shows that he did not cause Floyd's death. In a motion filed in federal court last week, Chauvin claims he never would have pleaded guilty in 2021 had he known about the theory that Floyd died from complications of a rare tumor called a paraganglioma that in rare cases can cause a fatal surge of adrenaline.3
  • Chauvin was found guilty of second-degree murder, third-degree murder, and second-degree manslaughter in a Minnesota state trial and sentenced to 22.5 years in prison. He later also pleaded guilty to a separate federal civil rights charge for which he was sentenced to 21 years in federal prison; he is serving both sentences concurrently in a federal prison in Arizona.4
  • Chauvin is separately appealing his federal civil rights charges.5
  • Floyd died on May 25, 2020, after Chauvin pinned him to the ground with his knee on Floyd's neck for over nine minutes. Floyd's death sparked worldwide protests over racism and police brutality.5

Sources: 1Associated Press, 2Reuters, 3FOX News, 4CBS and 5ABC News.

Narratives

  • Left narrative, as provided by Newsweek. Derek Chauvin received a fair trial and a just sentence. Chauvin received due process and must now deal with the consequences of his actions while he is in prison. This case proves that no one, not even a police officer, is above the law. This ruling is angering many on the right which shows the continued issues with systemic racism in America as shown by this historic case.
  • Right narrative, as provided by Breitbart. Chauvin's trial was obviously not fair or unbiased. The case received extensive pre-trial publicity that likely poisoned the jury pool and it would be naive to say that the threat of violence evidenced did not have an influence on the jury's decisions. Armored cars and National Guard troops were needed to keep the peace, and this case should be reheard in light of the new evidence.