Derek Chauvin invokes 5th Amendment and says he will not testify at trial

[DonViejo]

Source: RawStory


Brad Reed
April 15, 2021

Former Minneapolis Police Officer Derek Chauvin on Thursday invoked his 5th Amendment rights and said he would not testify at his trial for the murder of George Floyd.

Via CNN's Jim Sciutto, Chauvin also emphasized that it was his own decision to not testify at the trial.

With Chauvin's announcement, the defense in the trial officially rested its case.

Link to tweet

###

Read more: https://www.rawstory.com/derek-chauvin-fifth-amendment/

[Siwsan]

1. Probably the smartest decision he's made, in a long time.

Hopefully it won't be a lengthy deliberation.

[FarPoint]

19. I say...

One day, a full day..

[DENVERPOPS]

39. No shit

he realizes that there is not a single f***ing thing he could say that WOULDN'T incriminate him.....

Those chicken shits are really really brave when it is three against one, in court, not so much..........

[MarineCombatEngineer]

2. So when do closing arguments start? nt

[WHITT]

3. First The Rebuttal

A whole lotta rebuttin' gonna go down.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

4. Thanks.

Guess we'll have to wait a few more days before closing arguments.

[AZSkiffyGeek]

5. I believe I heard news estimating Monday a few days ago

That may have been assuming Chauvin would testify though.

[COL Mustard]

47. I Always Thought Rebuttal

Is what happened when I gained back the weight I had just lost.

[Deminpenn]

20. Monday

Judge told the jury at the end of last week that the defense would likely be finished with its case on Thursday. Since the jury will be sequestered once the prosecution and defense make their closing arguments, he would did not want to start on Friday and have the jurors sequestered on the weekend,

[Jim__]

6. Good. I think the jury factors that in.

I know they're told not to, but people are people, and you can tell them to ignore the elephant in the room, but ...

[Rocknation]

32. I understand the idea that the case should be strong enough WITHOUT the defendant's testimony

Last edited Thu Apr 15, 2021, 03:10 PM - Edit history (2)

But ordering jurors not to "infer" anything from a defendant's invoking it is like -- well, ordering them not to breathe.


rocktivity

[NH Ethylene]

7. I thought defendants either testified or they didn't. Didn't know it required pleading the 5th.

That always comes across as an admission of guilt so, in general, it seems a bit of a burden on the defense in any trial.

[Mme. Defarge]

9. My question also.

[Aristus]

10. Me either.

Since a defendant is not required by law to testify against himself, I thought a formal motion to decline to take the stand was unnecessary.

I thought a motion was only required of the defendant agreed to take the stand.

[NurseJackie]

11. You're right... the details are confusing. It seems unnecessary for such an announcement to be made.

I'm no legal expert, but I watch many procedural dramas on TV (so I guess I'm *that* kind of "expert&quot so I assume that his defense team's intention for him to NOT testify would have been clear from the beginning.

Was this "5th amendment" declaration made in open court, in front of the jury? Was it announced in open court?

Via CNN's Jim Sciutto, Chauvin also emphasized that it was his own decision to not testify at the trial.

The RawStory writer was a bit ambiguous with that statement. Did he make this emphasis "at the trial"? Or did he emphasize privately that he didn't want to testify "at the trial".

[Deminpenn]

21. Apparently Nelson is trying to avoid Chauvin claiming he wanted to testify

but his lawyer would not allow it.

[NurseJackie]

23. That's good thinking... especially if that could have been used as a basis for an appeal.

[Deminpenn]

24. Yes, for the record should Chauvin want to appeal

nt

[NH Ethylene]

51. It was not done in front of the jury, as per the evening news. n/t

[NurseJackie]

52. Thanks!

[cstanleytech]

29. Mind you I am not a lawyer but it seems like he could be subpoenaed to testify in which case he

does have the right to invoke the 5th.

[marie999]

37. I don't think the defendant can be subpoenaed to testify in a criminal trial.

[cstanleytech]

41. If that was the case though we would not need the 5th amendment as

that provides some protection from being forced to testify.

[bdamomma]

8. With the evidence that was

presented to the jury the last two weeks, this murderer should be convicted.

[Stuart G]

14. I also believe the muderer will be convicted. On a number of charges too.

Not just one charge. Long jail term. And the murder will not do well in whatever prison he is
sent to....Not well at all

[cstanleytech]

31. Well Trump should have been convicted as well and we saw how the Republican Senators decided to

put their party first and protect him so a conviction in this case is not a slam dunk.

[StrictlyRockers]

12. He's guilty af. Wouldn't an innocent person want to testify to their innocence?

Lock him up.

[OnlinePoker]

17. Scary that I agree with something Trump said

"If you're innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?"

Of course, he then pardoned people who had taken the 5th, so...

[jmowreader]

34. That's not a good idea even if you are innocent

A prosecutor who "needs" your conviction because he was stupid enough to bring a bad case to trial can, potentially, get you to confess on the stand to shit you couldn't possibly have done.

[FakeNoose]

13. If Chauvin had taken the witness stand and testified

... then the prosecutors would have been allowed to ask him about the fact that he knew George Floyd previously, and had worked with him previously. This crucial fact has been withheld from the jury.

[Deminpenn]

22. Not just that, but the 18 other complaints filed against

Chauvin previously.

[bdamomma]

15. what I noticed and watched

with the evidence being presented was how his full weight was on George, to the point that Chauvin's tip of his shoe was off the ground. Like WTF!!!

[Chakaconcarne]

44. and his hand in his pocket as if he was trying to increase his center of gravity.

[Deminpenn]

53. Another DU'er pointed out that Chauvin's hand isn't in his

pocket, but resting knuckles down on his thigh. The hand looks like it's in his pocket because he's wearing black gloves that blend in with his black uniform pants. But you have to look closely to see that.

[Probatim]

16. Considering the quality of his defense team relative to the prosecution, I'm not surprised.

[Calista241]

40. I've watched most of the trial, and Nelson has done a very good job for the defense.

He's also at a major disadvantage. The state has assigned 16 different lawyers to the team prosecuting this case. Nelson is defending Chauvin by himself, with one newly barred attorney as an assistant.

That means each of the states attorneys only has to be intimately familiar with one particular aspect of the state's case. Nelson has to be intimately familiar with everything, and that's how details fall through the cracks.

Nelson has already laid the groundwork for appeal as well. He's gotten into the court record that the state has turned over nearly 5000 pieces of evidence to the defense after the trial began. And Nelson is in that courtroom 10 hours a day without time to adequately review the new discovery.

Nelson also tore apart the state's use of force experts. When the state's own witnesses concede that Chauvin wasn't on Floyd's neck, and that they done the exact same thing as Chauvin (only their subjects in custody didn't die), that's bad for the state's case. He even got them to say that what Chauvin did was within the department's policy.

I also think the state has fumbled parts of the prosecution. Their use of force witnesses were weak. The defense's cause of death experts were also more believable, and the state's cross on those witnesses was a little too aggressive. And then after a sidebar where the judge chastised them for it, it was a little too sarcastic. The defense's use of force experts did have a pretty major crash and burn under cross-examination though.

Has Nelson done enough to get a full acquittal, I kinda doubt it. But he's done an admirable job given the evidence he's up against. And it wouldn't surprise me at all if Chauvin walks on the more serious murder charges.

[Jim__]

50. Just a note: Eric Nelson isn't working alone to defend Derek Chauvin

From USAToday: Eric Nelson isn't working alone to defend Derek Chauvin: A police legal fund is backing him up with a dozen lawyers and $1 million

...

Attorney Eric Nelson stands with Chauvin and Amy Voss – whom Nelson describes as his "assistant" but is a licensed attorney – on one side of the courtroom of Judge Peter Cahill. Several feet away, there’s a rotating crew of four state prosecutors, including Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison.

Despite appearances, Nelson is hardly working solo. Nelson, a private attorney with the firm Halberg Criminal Defense, has plenty of help from the Minneapolis Police and Peace Officers Association's legal defense fund.

The group, Minnesota's largest federation of officers and unions, is paying for up to a dozen other attorneys working the case behind the scenes, according to MPPOA Executive Director Brian Peters. Nelson has assistance and lots of cash to spend on a trial that is likely to run at least a month, Peters said.

“You know the matchup," Peters said. “The 12 attorneys on our side work very well together, so it's not like Eric is doing this case alone.”

...

[Deminpenn]

54. Thanks

I thought the police association/police allies would be providing lawyers and wondered why Nelson was "working alone". Probably trying a subtle tactic of "poor Chauvin and his lawyer against the world" to the jury.

If Nelson had 1M, they should've been able to find better and more credible expert witnesses. The retired MD ME started off well enough until he began spouting the nonsense about CO2, weight distribution and so on.

[gohuskies]

25. Let's also not forget Chauvin is also accused of being a tax cheat

He is in a deep hole of his own making that includes this as well as cold blooded murder.

[Marthe48]

26. The video shows his action, his crime

I think that incriminated him with no words spoken.

[Marthe48]

27. I'd like to know more about the connection chauvin and Mr. Floyd had at a club

I heard more than once that they knew each other previous to the murder. Did that play in? Or was chauvin just used to using brute force in his confrontations with citizens and getting away with it?

[marble falls]

28. Not a good look at all. But totally undrstand it.

[Rocknation]

33. There's a very special legal term for being unable to defend yourself without implicating yourself

Guilty.


rocktivity

[marble falls]

38. Not an easy look to shake, especially when, like Derek Chauvin, one is guilty as sin.

[H2O Man]

30. Recommended.

I think the defense attorney recognizes that the potential for a hung jury has faded, and that he is now focused on grounds for an appeal. I am reminded of Rubin's defense team's efforts to win in the federal courts -- and while the appeal was on constitutional issues, learning that these courts were more likely to overturn a jury's decision if they had heard the defendant testify.

[BobTheSubgenius]

35. Do you have to invoke to avoid testifying.

Odd that this would be the first I've heard of that.

[MarcA]

36. Notice he referred to the Fifth as a "privilege", not a Right.

Maybe he has been so Privileged in his life and occupation that he does not
know or acknowledge the difference.

[FBaggins]

43. The 5th involves both

[SpankMe]

42. Conservatives are the first to say...

...that if you invoke the 5th, that's a sign of guilt.

[IbogaProject]

45. It might be a Minnesota legal peculiarity

It might be a Minnesota legal peculiarity due to his being a public employee.

[COL Mustard]

46. What's The Over/Under On Conviction?

How long a term will he get?

[Jilly_in_VA]

48. He has no defense.

That is all.

[Aussie105]

55. Shame!

I was hoping he would be asked questions to reveal if:

He is just a sadistic person who felt the uniform gave him the right to use excessive force to kill someone.

OR

He just hates people of color in general.

OR

He especially hated this particular person of color.

Whatever . . . go to jail! Now! For a long time!

Hope he meets some people of color in there!
There could be an 'accident' waiting for him.

[Aussie105]

56. Duplicate post removed.